draft-ash-mpls-dste-bcmodel-max-alloc-resv -> WG document?

[Jim Boyle <jboyle@pdnets.com>]

When Jerry incorporates the discussed revisions, he would like to resubmit 
it as a WG document.  I think that makes sense, as it was the course of 
action on the other drafts (MAM, RDM).

Any comments?

thanks

Jim

On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS wrote:

> > Hi, this is to allow the WG list to weigh in the 
> > consensus from the meeting.  This email is on the 
> > DS-TE drafts...
> 
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ash-mpls-dste-bcmodel-max-alloc-resv-01.txt
> 
> > This draft will be revised
> 
> Yes, as agreed, I'll add a section on 'assumptions & applicability' to the I-D.
> 
> > it was not discussed if it should be re-updated as 
> > a WG document.  If that is the Jerry's intention, 
> > he can bring that question to the WG list.
> 
> The agreement was to "progress MAR" (my notes), which is consistent with the proposal in my slides to "specify/progress MAR".
> Also, the meeting minutes say "the way to go forward is to make all of them [BC models] experimental"
> 
> Thanks,
> 'the Jerry'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>