RE: GMPLS Last Calls

[Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>]

Hi Don,

> I have followed this thread and think that there is something more 
> fundamental going on here. The last call for RFC is a milestone for 
> any draft. The issue is that GMPLS is so large the only way we can 
> tackle it is to have interim RFCs that begin to point the way to 
> solving the problem.

Actually, GMPLS has been broken up: there are now 3 major sets of
docs: the "base" GMPLS docs, GMPLS for SONET/SDH, and the upcoming
GMPLS doc for G.709 networks.  The base GMPLS docs are in pretty good
shape; most of the issues (some would say pseudo-issues) being raised
are for the SONET/SDH doc.

BTW, another important factor is that the number of folks (from both
carriers and vendors) that are interested in GMPLS is very high;
CCAMP and IPO have become magnets much the way MPLS was over the
past four years (and still is).  While this is in general great news,
the number of divergent opinions, alternative drafts and proposals,
and issues raised has skyrocketed, as well as, sad to say, the degree
of, how should I put it, "highly charged non-technical discussion".
This means that progress will of necessity be slower, but hopefully,
it also means that GMPLS will be more wide-ranging, and meet a
broader range of carrier needs.

Perhaps this increased number of participants is the "something more
fundamental" that's going on.  I'll leave it to the IESG to figure
it out, and if needed, propose remedies for the "growing pains"
which seem concommitant with success.

Kireeti.