Hi,
I asked:
... since we all expressed our opinions on the draft, JP
has drawn our attention to the IPR claim registered at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/872/. So, before we go ahead
and adopt the work, I just need to check that there is no
new strong opinion against it.
And no-one has expressed such an opinion, so we can go ahead.
Authors, please resubmit as draft-ietf-pce-monitoring-00.txt making only the
usual minimal changes.
Please attach a copy of the email supplied here so that the Secretariat
accept your submission.
Dimitri asked:
the question is what is the object of the support that
we have seen on the list ? the need for monitoring of the
performance or the solution ?
=> both aspects are strongly inter-related.
I can't really judge that since the question I originally asked was whether
there was support for adopting the I-D. It seems to me that the support for
the I-D indicates definite support for the need for monitoring. It seems
likely that the support for the I-D suggests using this as the basis for the
WG solution, but the WG is (of course) free to work on this solution and
modify it as driven by consensus.
Thanks,
Adrian
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
Please make space for draft-ietf-pce-monitoring-00.txt that will replace
draft-vasseur-pce-monitoring-03.txt
The authors will submit it soon.
Thanks,
Adrian
--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
