Loa, Without any hats on, I would note:
a) As far as I'm aware, this has seen two independent prototypes implemented. b) I have not heard any concrete technical concerns. Stewart and I did specificallly discuss MRT this past IETF. I am, of course, quite interested in hearing any concrete technical concerns. c) I'd be happy seeing this question asked of more drafts :-) Regards, Alia On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Loa Andersson <[email protected]> wrote: > Working Groups, > > We have don an MPLS-RT of draft-atlas-mpls-ldp-mrt, the reviews has been > posted to the mpls wg mailing list. > > In his MPLS-RT review Stewart Bryant says: > > "I have concerns about whether or not MRT technology has the maturity > expected in the standards track. However that decision needs to be > taken in RTGWG and MPLS needs to follow their and lead in determining > the fate and track of this draft. This draft should not be published > ahead of the drafts that define the technology that it is supporting." > > He also says that he see no reason not to go ahead and start the poll to > see if we have consensus to adopt the document as an mpls wg document. > > The question Stewart ask is valid, and we'd like input from the rtgwg > and rtgwg chairs (copied on this mail). We will also copy both the > poll for adoption and the wglc to the rtgwg mailing list. > > /Loa > mpls wg co-chair > -- > > > Loa Andersson email: [email protected] > Senior MPLS Expert [email protected] > Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 > > _______________________________________________ > rtgwg mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg >
_______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
