(WG-chair hat off) I agree. I haven't seen any work on the ARC drafts in the last year. I don't see the work needed to take an algorithm into the functioning MRT architecture. Remember that it's taken a good amount of time to flesh out all the details for MRT.
Alia On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Gábor Sándor Enyedi < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Please keep in mind that even if MRT and ARC are both using the > "ear-decomposition", they are using it in a different way. Some > merging/common work may be possible, but I don't feel the common points too > strong now. Maybe we should speak about this in Vancouver. > > Gabor > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > IJsbrand Wijnands > Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 12:31 PM > To: Alvaro Retana > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: WG Adoption of MRT Algorithms Draft > (draft-enyedi-rtgwg-mrt-frr-algorithm) > > Dear WG, > > From a multicast POV I support this work to be adopted. Being able to > build two non-intersection paths through a single plane network is very > useful for Multicast live-live and MoFRR deployments. It solves a real > problem which we see in today's networks. > > A more challenging question to answer is how > draft-enyedi-rtgwg-mrt-frr-algorithm relates to draft-thubert-rtgwg-arc-00 > and draft-thubert-rtgwg-arc-bicast-00. I don't know if both can move > forward individually or if some merge is possible. It would be good if the > authors get together and discuss this. > > Thx, > > Ice. > > On 27 Sep 2013, at 14:53, Alvaro Retana (aretana) <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > This message starts a two-week Call for WG Adoption for 'Algorithms for > computing Maximally Redundant Trees for IP/LDP Fast-Reroute' > (draft-enyedi-rtgwg-mrt-frr-algorithm). > > > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-enyedi-rtgwg-mrt-frr-algorithm > > > > At the meeting in Berlin the authors asked for the WG adoption of their > draft, but here were very few people in the room who had actually reviewed > the document to get any type of read of the room. > > > > We want to hear from people who have read and understood the draft > (besides the authors!) about this topic. Please provide some explanation > as to why you support or not the adoption of the draft - avoid "+1". > > > > This call will be over by EOD on Oct/11, 2013 (pick your favorite time > zone). > > > > Thanks!! > > > > Alvaro. > > _______________________________________________ > > rtgwg mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg > > _______________________________________________ > rtgwg mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg > _______________________________________________ > rtgwg mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg >
_______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
