Re: ASON RSVP-TE draft to WG doc
Adrian Farrel <adrian <at> olddog.co.uk>
2003-12-01 20:45:36 GMT
Thanks for a considered and rational email.
Can I comment on a couple of points?
> Some rationale (very high level):
> It seems premature, and it is not a good idea to have parallel track
> documents in ITU-T and IETF to do the same thing.
> In terms of whether it is in Scope, ASON is inherently beyond IETF
> scope. It applies to networks where the transport (data) plane is
> not necessarily IP. It applies to networks where addresses are not
> necessarily IP addresses. It applies to networks where demarcation
> and separation are needed in a manner that is not part of how all-IP
> networks are built. The requirements inherently come from, or belong
> to, ITU-T.
Yet, at the same time, it uses an IP-based signling protocol developed by, and still under
development by the IETF. Those things make it in scope. More precisely, it is explicitly
in scope of the CCAMP WG because it is in the charter.
The charter was reviewed and discussed and I certainly didn't see anyone object.
But, I agree with you that the requirements belong to ITU-T. That is why the current
requirements draft is only an attempt to restate the requirements in terms of GMPLS
signaling and in terms and fortmat that are easy for IETF-heads to parse.
> On the other hand, nobody wants to invent a new protocol from scratch
> when there are existing protocols that meet many of the requirements.