RE: New charter

["Vishal Sharma" <v.sharma@ieee.org>]

Kireeti,

Responses in-line...

-Vishal

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org]On
> Behalf Of Kireeti Kompella
> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 10:22 PM
> To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: New charter

<snip>

> Please keep this subject line (simply reply to this mail).  The
> deadline is Friday Dec 3, 17:00 PST.
>
> 1) MPLS-GMPLS migration                       Yes
> 2) GMPLS interoperability issues              Yes
> 3a) should the IETF take on L1VPNs?           Yes
> 3b) if yes to 3a, should this be done in CCAMP?   Yes
> 4) Waveband switching                          --
> 5) Control plane work                          Yes
> 6) Decoder ring for addresses                  --
> 7) Deployment considerations for GMPLS         Yes
> 8) PCE requirements                           Shouldn't this be done in
PCE itself??
> 9) QoS control                                Tentative yes, depends on
what is
                                                involved.
>
> A rough idea of what each of the above entails follows.
>
> 1) MPLS-GMPLS migration
> 	implementation shift from "MPLS" objects to "GMPLS" objects
> 	BCP on deployment migration for the same
>
> 2) GMPLS interoperability issues
> 	what addresses to use where
> 	nits/clarifications of the specs
> 	guidelines for path computation & constraints
> 	survay
>
> 3) L1VPN work items
> 	identify protocol extensions needed
> 	state what can already be done with what we have
> 	do the actual protocol work for requirements that are not met
> 	liaisons to SG13 as needed
>
> 5) Control plane work
> 	resiliency
> 	graceful shutdown
>
> 6) Decoder ring for addresses
> 	for each address field, identify its nature and ITU equivalent
> 	(may overlap with part of (2))
>
>
> 4, 7-9 are obvious or have been elaborated on the mailing list.
>
> Kireeti.
> -------
>
> PS: The topic of GTTP has carefully been avoided.  More later.
>