LMP transport [Was: Re: Soliciting comments on moving drafts to WG status]

["Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>]

> Conditional "yes" to draft-aboulmagd-ccamp-transport-lmp-02.txt, depending
> on the answer to the following:
>
> Does Author plan to address link management solution space between ASON and
> GMPLS in the same document? I would prefer that and in which case I think
> adaptation of this document as a WG document to be deferred to a later
> point.

Hi Zafar,

I'm not quite clear what you mean by "address link management solution space". Do you mean
a comparison of the ways that LMP is used and any extensions that may have been made to
the protocol? Or do you mean an analysis of what needs to be "fixed" and the appropriate
new extensions to the protocol?

If the latter, I think a question that led in this direction was asked in SD.

Kireeti's response was to the effect that we have to do the analysis first, identifying
the "secret decoder ring", and showing the differences between the ITU and IETF views.
Then we would start a series of liaisons to SG15 to figure out what needs to be fixed and
by whom. Finally, work could begin on protocol modifications.

This document is targeted at the first step only.

OTOH, if you meant the first option (i.e. a comparison of how the protocol is used and
what extensions have already been made), that seems to me to be valuable in this document.

What do the authors say?

Cheers,
Adrian