[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-andersson-mpls-g-chng-proc-00.txt
john, here it is ...
... and if i well remember.. trying to summarize
here the issue:
1) in order to initiate an action a clear under
standing of the problem must be achieved by the
ccamp wg community in order to make this happen
2) expect that ietf community would understand
the terminology used in g.8080 (and subsequently
the issue) by sending a liaison was probably
a bit too optimistic -> thus the idea was to
initiate a sort of "decoder ring" (just to be sure
that when we say a "table" we are all in common
agreement on what a table is)
3) instead of request changes to gmpls it would
have been much more constructive to know really
what are the architectural aspects covered by
itu that are the key in enabling signalling for
optical networks -> from that *clear* perspective
the ccamp wg was expecting a "functional spec"
i-d ... since the idea here was to understand
the functional requirement outside of any specific
signalling protocol (thus make abstraction of
what was included in g.7713.x in a first phase)
4) once terminology + functional aspects would
have been understood by the ccamp wg deliver the
right answer using the ccamp community tools and
protocols
in brief, the idea developed in yokohama was
"please put the g.8080 architecture on the table,
and let's have a signalling functional i-d to
clearly understand the issue and then the ccamp
wg community will deliver the adequate gmpls
profile" instead of that the two editors of the
document decided to go the "info track" ... i
never understood the real argumentation behind
this ... clearly as we say in french "la sauce
n'a pas prise" but i consider this as a turning-
point in the ccamp/sg15 collaboration
then, as already pointed out, we couldn't avoid
"that the SDO can decide to do it on its own, but
then changes the name of the protocol so that
innocent bystanders can tell the difference."
and this is what happened for signalling.
note: kireeti please correct me if you think
there is something missing or wrong here
hope this clarifies,
- dimitri.
John Drake wrote:
>
> George,
>
> I didn't attend.
>
> Thanks,
>
> John
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: George Newsome [mailto:gnewsome@ieee.org]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 10:17 AM
> > To: John Drake
> > Cc: 'Kireeti Kompella'; Stephen Trowbridge; ccamp@ops.ietf.org;
> > mpls@UU.NET
> > Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-andersson-mpls-g-chng-proc-00.txt
> >
> >
> > John Drake wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Snipped...
> > >
> > > Stephen Trowbridge asked what further information the IETF
> > requires.
> > >
> > > Dimitri and Kireeti answered the question in detail."
> > >
> >
> >
> > And the answer was ????
> >
> > A pity that the detailed answer is apparently not minuted.
> >
> > George
> >
--
Papadimitriou Dimitri
E-mail : dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be
Private: http://www.rc.bel.alcatel.be/~papadimd/index.html
E-mail : dpapadimitriou@psg.com
Public : http://psg.com/~dpapadimitriou/
Address: Fr. Wellesplein 1, B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium
Phone : +32 3 240-8491