The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2007-Mar> msg00351



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

[mpls] RE: [PWE3] Proposed G.8110.1 Amendment 1 Laision response

  • From: Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com>
  • Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 16:21:15 +0100
  • Authentication-Results: ams-dkim-2; header.From=stbryant@cisco.com; dkim=pass (sig from cisco.com/amsdkim2001 verified; );
  • Cc: Mark Townsley <townsley@cisco.com>, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>, mpls@ietf.org
  • DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1799; t=1174922479;x=1175786479; c=relaxed/simple; s=amsdkim2001;h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version;d=cisco.com; i=stbryant@cisco.com;z=From:=20Stewart=20Bryant=20<stbryant@cisco.com>|Subject:=20Re=3A=20[mpls]=20RE=3A=20[PWE3]=20Proposed=20G.8110.1=20Amendment=201=20Laision=20response |Sender:=20;bh=Nn8lCgLCvtCR3aDUPHc/cr62Oql84LyEk2uL1tlJ29U=;b=l8taW67VB321WVSJZDTGwTdDhH7C51+jYz5IPTYquRhQHH67T+X507wfuqJC1qb6K0YIseUZPukAhjmi6vlvZx3fLSTcUrDBZcyF0rayvknsCYr7o3CUn9xET7DsH18W;
  • User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Macintosh/20070221)

Hamid Ould-Brahim wrote:
> Italo, 
>
>   
>> I feel a little bit unconfortable with the second part of the 
>> proposed liaison:
>>
>> "The PWE3 WG will perform a further review of G.8110.1 
>> Amendment 1 and will respond in time for the ITU SG15 meeting 
>> in June."
>>
>> It sounds like the draft has not been read at all. I do not 
>> think this is a polite message we wish to give to ITU.
>>
>> I would propose to smoote a little bit the message with 
>> something like:
>>
>> "The PWE3 WG has not found other major issues than those 
>> identified by the MFA Forum, however it will perform a 
>> further detailed review of G.8110.1 Amendment 1 and will 
>> respond in time for the ITU SG15 meeting in June."
>>
>>     
>
> Since PWE3 intends to perform a detailed review of the proposal
> I don't think at this point in time PWE3 is in position
> to conclude that it "has not found other major issues than 
> those identified by the MFA forum". 
>
> Hamid.
>   
Thanks Hamid, absence of proof is not proof of absence.

Please note that the ITU (T)MPLS work has been taking huge resources from
the PWE3 & MPLS ADs and chairs. Since last summer one week of
1AD + 2WG  chairs, and one week of 2WG chairs  to ensure that the first
version of T-MPLS  complied with the IETF PWE3/MPLS architecture -
and when we did find an error it took significant time to negotiate the
changes needed for compliance in multiple ITU groups across multiple
documents.

Plus the work on the current set of documents needing review....

There are six that need working on at

https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/liaisons.cgi

i.e. the G.8110.1 amendment above and five others.

The PWE3 chairs  would appreciate any comments on those documents.

Thanks

Stewart



_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls