> >Please ask your customers on which method they prefer. Both > methods and > >all three path identification have been developed and > deployed. We are > >only describing how protocols suppose to work, not mandating > customer > >requirements. > > I am not sure I agree with you. IESG has repeatedly asked for > a single mandatory method. Otherwise IETF RFCs become an > archive for peoples > implementations.
Both methods solve different problems, thus, they are mandatory. > For proof just look at PWE3 ATM-ENCAP draft. > I don't know much about IESG process, but I do know that the proof of the pudding is in the eating. - Ping
