Re: GMPLS Issue - Ethernet LSP Enc Type

[Yakov Rekhter <yakov@juniper.net>]

George,

> > > > At 10:55 AM 12/18/2001, Ben Mack-Crane wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >The following issue raised 10/29/01 has not been addressed.
> > > >
> ........................
> > > >
> > > > The current wording is what was agreed to.
> > > >
> > >
> > >So if I understand this correctly, the wording that you allude to was
> > >agreed in private discusions?
> > 
> > To be precise, the wording was agreed to among all the authors.
> > 
> I stand corrected - agreed to in private discussions among all the
> authors.
> 
> > >Without public discussion,
> > 
> > I think you'd agree that it's impractical to review in detail every change
> > in a draft, prior to it being made, on the ccamp list.  What we have done
> > is to reach agreement first among the co-authors and then to review the
> > changes as part of issuing the new drafts.   The encoding type change was
> > made *9* months ago.  There has been ample opportunity for review and comme
> > comment.
> > 
> Actually I disagree. In other bodies documents are reviewed on a line by
> line basis until all parties indicate agreement.

I hope it would not surprise you that the rules of "other bodies" 
may not apply to the IETF, as in the IETF there is a need only for "rough 
consensus", and not for all parties to reach an agreement. 

Yakov.