RE: WG Consensus Call: draft-swallow-gmpls-overlay-00.txt

[Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>]

Hi Greg,

On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Greg Bernstein wrote:

> Hi it wasn't clear from this call whether this document would be standards
> track or informational.

Typically, calls for consensus don't state the targetted track, although
in my opinion all drafts should say so fairly early in their lives.

> Since this document is more in the vein of an architecture document.  I'd
> say it could only be an informational document.

How does that argument stand up in the light that the MPLS and GMPLS
architecture documents are standards track?

> It doesn't introduce any new
> functionality (rather just a proper subset of OIF UNI) and just details a
> possible deployment scenario using GMPLS protocols.

Not completely accurate: it modifies processing of RSVP messages, in
particular the ERO and RRO.  Therefore it should be standards track.

> Hence, I'm not for this being a working group document.  The deployment
> scenario outlined should be in the GMPLS architecture (informational)
> document.  I don't see enough content to warrant a separate document.

Noted.  I'd gotten the opposite impression from your earlier mail, so
I'll reverse that.

Thanks,
Kireeti.