Re: Drafts update

[Eric Gray <eric.gray@sandburst.com>]

Kireeti,

    Is there any reason why you skipped number 4?  Here's my answers
to 1-3 and 5-6...

    1. Yes, CCAMP
    2. Wait to hear why this is a 'common control and management plane'
            issue as opposed to an optical networking specific issue.
    3. Yes
    5. Wait until after London meeting to gauge its acceptance there
    6. Yes

You wrote:

> Hi Folks,
>
> Can we get a sense of the consensus whether the following drafts
> should be made CCAMP WG documents?  Please respond with
> (a) yes
> (b) no
> (c) wait
>
> 1. draft-dubuc-lmp-mib-02.txt
> 2. draft-fontana-ccamp-gmpls-g709-00.txt
> 3. draft-kompella-ospf-gmpls-extensions-02.txt
> 5. draft-mannie-ccamp-gmpls-concatenation-conversion-00.txt
> 6. draft-many-ccamp-gmpls-routing-00.txt
>
> (Note: for draft-dubuc-lmp-mib-02.txt, the question is, should this
>  be a WG document, either in MPLS or CCAMP.)
>
> Thanks,
> Kireeti.