In message
<2691ce0099834e4a9c5044eec662bb9d45239...@dfweml509-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Lucy yong writes:
> One comment as one of co-authors.
>
> Suggest to change the title to "requirements for a composite link in
> MPLS network". This will make consistent with the title in the
> framework doc.
>
> Lucy
>
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> Alia Atlas
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 1:42 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: WGLC on draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-09
>
> This is to start a working group last call on
> draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-09. The WGLC will conclude on March
> 15; extra time is given to include the IETF meeting.
>
> Please read and send comments.
>
> Thanks,
> Alia & Alvaro
Lucy,
This is the second and only remaining comment in the last call. Sorry
I missed replying to this. The request is to change the title. If
you don't mind making CLs and networks plural in the title then:
OLD
Requirements for MPLS Over a Composite Link
NEW
Requirements for Composite Links in MPLS Networks
I just made this change since it seems non-controversial and it seems
to me to be a better title.
The only other change was requested by Alia and that was removing the
sentence "Current practice related to multipath is described briefly
in an appendix." from the abstract (that appendix is now in the use
cases document).
draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirement-10 has been posted.
If there are no objections to the title change, then the WG chairs can
conclude the last call.
Curtis
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
