Re: Communication from the OIF

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

Hi Deborah,

> As you say, it is not for CCAMP to comment on OIF's definition of
> "basis" in regards to ITU Recommendations.

Well, yes. But we clearly need to understand what is going on. We are trying to bridge the
gaps between IETF/ITU-T/OIF and so Lyndon's explanations are helpful.

> Your comment triggered another item which we should include - we still
> have not received any response from OIF on CCAMP's previous liaison
> (March) regarding OIF's intentions with their OSPF work.

It may be my fault for not raising the right flag. (right flag, not white flag ;-)
You can see all incoming communications to CCAMP at http://www.olddog.co.uk/incoming.htm
The response to our questions can be seen at
http://www.olddog.co.uk/OIF_to_IETF_June_2004.pdf

[SNIP]

> - in the interests of future cooperation, encourage OIF to timely
> communicate questions/concerns regarding IETF protocols,
> e.g. prior to OIF protocol development/demos.

This is, indeed, the point of the exercise. Rather than develop three solutions and
attempt to converge them (or fight about which is best), we would be well advised to pool
our resources and attempt to develop a single solution based on public discussion drawing
on different experts in different bodies. For any one body to claim that it has a monopoly
on expertise would be risable.

Hopefully this is what we are going to achieve through the three-way joint ASON routing
design team. I would be disappointed if *any* of the three bodies involves ratified or
standardised any document in this area before all of the bodies were in agreement. It is
(of course) reasonable for any participating body or individual to publish papers and to
conduct experiments as a way of progressing the discussion. Using such work to present a
fait acompli would be frowned upon, and it would surely be helpful for all bodies and
individuals to caveat their publications or public demonstrations with a statement such
as...

The IETF, ITU-T and OIF are currently engaged in a joint activity to develop standardized
solutions for ASON routing. This current work should be regarded as provisional and may
change as the result of the joint activity.


Cheers,
Adrian