RE: Review: draft-ietf-l3vpn-ppvpn-mcast-reqts

[benjamin.niven-jenkins at bt.com]

Thomas Morin <mailto:thomas.morin at rd.francetelecom.com> wrote:
>> Section 5.2.11 5th paragraph: replace "from possibly" with "for".
> 
> Why should the 'possibly' be removed ?
> Its important to keep in mind no standardized solution exist
> yet for multicast in 2547 VPNs or VR.

Because IMO it is superfluous and irrelevant.  The original sentence is
"In any case a solution SHOULD state a migration policy from possibly
existing deployments."

A solution should provide a migration policy for existing deployemnts.
Whether such a migration policy is for an actual deployment as opposed
to a possible deployment is not relevant, by catering for actual
deployments you automatically cater for possible deployments.  Changing
"from possibly" to "for" doesn't change the meaning of the sentence IMO
but makes it read a bit better.

Unless you mean that a solution should state a migration policy for
current solutions that are not currently deployed but which may be
deployed in the future?

Ben