The MPLS WG Archive

[George Swallow <swallow@cisco.com>]

This thread has been quite for some time.  I'd like to see where the
workgroup is.  

Also, as the primary author of RFC3209 I like to state that I believe
the RFC defines hard prememption, since it says one should send a RESV
Err message and doesn't say anything about setting the InPlace bit
(which I consider to be an exception that would need to be called out).
Further there is no discussion of 

   a) lowering the forwarding priority
   b) how long to allow the situation to persist if the Source of the TE
      takes no corrective action.

However, I will take a mea culpa on the draft being less than completely
clear.

> But, if the WG is happy with the existing situation and drafts that is
> fine (although someone should write a BCP to ease the interpretation 
> of RFC3209).

I don't think a BCP is needed, but any new RFC we produce will need to
include an applicability statement which includes the consensus
interpretation of RFC3209.

So the question is, as Adrian put it, is "the WG is happy with the
existing situation and drafts"?

...George

========================================================================
George Swallow             Cisco Systems                  (978) 936-1398
                           1414 Massachusetts Avenue
                           Boxborough, MA 01719