Re: Advancing the Protocol and Morin Drafts

["Adrian Farrel" <adrian at olddog.co.uk>]

Hi,

> 1.) To accept draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations-03 as a working
> group document;  and

Support.

> 2.) To turn this document into a requirements draft, with mandatory to
> implement features for an interoperable implementation. The authors
> have indicated that they are willing to do this.

I support your intention here, but not your choice of words.

Requirements drafts can state functions that must be provided by a solution.
Solutions drafts can state implementation requirements.

> Our intention is, if this approach is accepted, to then begin WG last
> call to submit to the IESG for publication:
>
> draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast
> draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast-bgp

I'm a bit cautious here. I think you will have to wait until you see the 
result of 2) before you know whether you are ready for last call or need 
further updates.

> We expect that these two documents will be submitted more or less as is
> (i.e., certainly with any new bug fixes or other necessary corrections 
> and improvements, but without specific mandatory to implement feature
> description in those drafts).

For the reasons stated above, I think your expectations are not 
well-founded.

> Please respond to the list with your recommendations for these two
> courses of action.
>
> Regards
> Marshall & Danny