Re: Moving forward with the CCAMP charter

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

> (1) Analysis of inter-domain issues for disjoint and protected paths
>        - Informational I-D to close off the topic and devolve to PCE
>        * first version of WG draft
>        * submit for IESG review
>
> Could you briefly elaborate on this item ?

I think we have the need for an informational I-D that is a bit like the
existing inter-domain framework I-D, but that examines the more complex
question of the provisioning of disjoint and protection paths across
domain boundaries. I am aware that there a lot of ideas out there and that
there has been a lot of research. I think we need to capture an overview.

It is my (personal - not WG chair) opinion that this I-D will point firmly
at the PCE WG. But just as for single paths we discovered that there are
some (limited) scenarios for single paths where signaling is suitable on
its own, we may find some solutions for diverse and protected paths.

> (2) May be in the same bucket as draft-ali-ccamp-mpls-graceful-
> shutdown, you may want to add draft-leroux-ccamp-ctrl-
> saturation-01.txt ?

Yes. I am inclined to add a work item for "control plane robustness".

Adrian