1 Jun 2004 03:50
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-farrel-ccamp-inter-domain-framework-00.txt
Tomohiro Otani <otani <at> kddilabs.jp>
2004-06-01 01:50:50 GMT
2004-06-01 01:50:50 GMT
Hi Adrian, Sorry for the delay of my response. I basically understand the intenstion of this draft. I know the charter deals with the problem and development of both MPLS and GMPLS. My concern is that there remains unclear what can be done for MPLS and not be done for GMPLS, vice versa. I agree with the procedure such that GMPLS inter-area/AS-TE framework is progresssed with MPLS one in a single draft, however, I strongly request to describe the common functions and differently supported functions more explicitely. In terms of RRO text, I will send it later. Regards, tomo At 23:55 04/05/20, Adrian Farrel wrote: >Hi Tomohiro, > >Thanks for reading the draft. > >> 1) Does this draft cover requirements described in draft-ietf-tewg-(Continue reading)interas- >> mpls-te-req-06.txt ? > >The intention is that the inter-as and inter-area drafts are inputs to this >ID. The >framework should not contradict any requirements expressed in those drafts. >
.
> > >
> > >Hey, I'm with you -- the scenarios are ordered roughly by preference
> >
> > this was not the intention in the draft though
RSS Feed