RE: [PWE3] draft-ietf-pwe3-ethernet-encap-02.txt: Tagged mode

["Andrew Smith" <ah_smith@acm.org>]

Well that really gets to the heart of my original point: is the IETF in
the business of writing good standards or of rubber-stamping existing
implementations and deployments? It's high time the IESG made a decision
on this, specifically in the sub-IP area, and enforced whatever it
decides its policy to be by culling and pruning WGs and/or WG products
appropriately.

Andrew Smith


-----Original Message-----
From: pwe3-admin@ietf.org [mailto:pwe3-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Rahul Aggarwal
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 5:23 PM
To: pwe3@ietf.org
Cc: luca@level3.net
Subject: [PWE3] draft-ietf-pwe3-ethernet-encap-02.txt: Tagged mode



Hi Luca,

Wanted to re-iterate my comment about the tagged mode in the ethernet
encapsulation draft. There is a value in having the tagged mode and
there
are several reasons for it:
    - Bunch of existing implementations; inter-operability and some
      deployment
    - Router hardware that cannot insert vlan tags on the egress PE

Some people might argue that all can be achieved with the raw mode and a
NSP function. No one is stopping them from using only the raw mode in
that
case :) But there are several of us who want the tagged mode to stay
there
and IMHO we should keep it that way.

thanks,
rahul 

_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
pwe3@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3