El 25/10/2012 11:39, Julien Meuric escribió:
One 1st comment at this stage: you seem to suggest that the idea is to
have separate document for MPLS-TE and GMPLS, but you do not give
rationale. Apart from our history of RFC 5440 + draft-ietf-pce-gmpls
(even with its scope, the former had a hard time), is there a
particular reason for this choice? Do you expect much difference
between those 2 kinds of extensions? Also keep in mind that GMPLS
includes PSC...
Dear Julien, all
Thanks for the feedback, I understand your point about GMPLS and, if I
recall correctly, one of the reasons mentioned in previous internal
discussions was the relative maturity of one (RFC5440) with regard to
the other (draft-ietf-pce-gmpls).
We can indeed discuss the different alternatives during IETF85, with all
the involved parties, authors, and the WG. Although, initially, I had a
slight preference to integrate GMPLS, (as I mentioned a while ago in my
review of Ed's earlier drafts), I am fine either way.
Maybe Ed, Jan, Ina, Fatai, Young, Xian or Oscar can comment on this?
Thanks and best regards,
R.
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
