Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-00.txt

[Zhi-Wei Lin <zwlin@lucent.com>]

Hi Kireeti,

So you contend then that <draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-00.txt> 
was a result of pulling stuff out of LMP. Then can I ask you to provide 
references (specific sections) in the original LMP document where the 
bulk of the text was taken?

Also, based on what you say, no I don't think we're suggesting any 
change to IETF process. Changing an existing WG document from one 
version to another is always done and always will be done based on 
additional considerations and input from the WG based on consensus. 
However, when creating a completely new/separate document then there is 
a question of how that new document gets WG status while another 
document that was submitted that probably is more consistent with the 
transport technology was not made into a WG document.

Zhi


Kireeti Kompella wrote:

> On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Bernstein, Greg wrote:
>
>  
> > This draft seems to contain new material not in LMP.  How can it be already
> > considered a working group item for CCAMP?
> >    
> draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-01.txt had material that was not already in
> draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-00.txt.  How can it be already considered a working
> group document item for CCAMP?  und so weiter ...  Are you suggesting
> a new process for documents in the IETF, or is it just for documents
> whose name contains the string 'lmp'?
>
> <chair>
> This draft is a separation of the original LMP draft into two documents,
> as suggested by the primary AD: a *base* document, technology-agnostic,
> and a SONET-SDH specific document.
>
> The fact that the latter document has new material is in response to
> requests from folks in CCAMP.  Both documents will undergo another WG
> Last Call.
> </chair>
>
> Kireeti.
>
>
>