Re: IGP Extensions - CCAMP Milestones

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

Thanks Dimitri,

I can't answer your question. The editors presumably can.

I hope this doesn't prevent us from making these WG documents, but rather
is a small technical point that needs to be resolved in the normal
process.

Cheers,
Adrian
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "dimitri papadimitriou" <dpapadimitriou@psg.com>
To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Cc: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 11:30 PM
Subject: Re: IGP Extensions - CCAMP Milestones


> adrian,
>
> could you explain the reasoning for having a TE specific TLV in the
> auto-mesh document with area and AS-wide flooding scope while the TE
> router cap TLV is restricted to an area flooding scope ? shouldn't be
> one way or the other i.e. either restrict all TE info area-local or
> allow for TE router cap TLV with AS-wide flooding scope ?
>
> note: there is nothing in the TE router cap TLV that would impact
> scaling more than the TE auto-mesh TLV does
>
> thanks,
> - dimitri.
>
> Adrian Farrel wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > We have two immediate milestones to address:
> >
> > Oct 05  First version WG I-D for Advertising TE Node Capabilities in
ISIS
> > and OSPF
> > Oct 05  First version WG I-D for Automatic discovery of MPLS-TE mesh
> > membership
> >
> > There are two personal submissions which address these topics:
> > draft-vasseur-ccamp-te-node-cap-01.txt
> > draft-vasseur-ccamp-automesh-02.txt
> >
> > I propose that we move these into the WG and then kick the tires
> > thoroughly.
> >
> > Opinions please.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Adrian
> >
> >
> >
> > .
> >
>
>