Re: [PWE3] [mpls-tp] [CCAMP] poll on making draft-sprecher-mpls-tp-oam-analysis-07.txt a working group draft

[Satoru Matsushima <satoru.matsushima at gmail.com>]

Hi,

> the data could be incorporated into the OAM
> architecture draft under construction.

I support this.
I think that the analysis document is a supplement to make decision,
it does not
make decision itself. If the analysis document become wg document, I hope
to set the date of completion the analysis.


--
Satoru Matsushima





2009/10/22 David Ward <dward at cisco.com>:
> Note that if we decide not to take the document in it's current form
> (history of decision making), the data could be incorporated into the OAM
> architecture draft under construction. We don't want to lose the
> information.
> -DWard
> On Oct 20, 2009, at 4:51 AM, Stewart Bryant wrote:
>
> I disagree. I believe that it is useful to document the OAM design
> decision and that this document is a good starting point.
>
> Remember that the poll is not whether to publish this document
> at any particular time, but to accept it as a starting point for
> the work of the WG.
>
> As such I think the document is useful, and a good staring point,
> which is why I expressed the view that it should become a WG doc.
>
> Stewart
>
>
>
> Sadler, Jonathan B. wrote:
>
> I agree with Tom that this document seems to be more of a set of meeting
> minutes/notes.  I don't see any reasoned analysis - just a statement of what
> is different between the two mechanisms and the requirements along with a
> recommendation.
> The fact no discussion of inter-layer interactions is shown in this document
> really concerns me as I believe its missing a key difference between the
> approaches catalogued.
> If the document contained reasoned analysis and delt with all issues, I
> would be able to support it.  But in its current form it is lacking the
> required substance.
> Jonathan Sadler
> ________________________________________
> From: ccamp-bounces at ietf.org [ccamp-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas D.
> Nadeau [tom.nadeau at bt.com]
> Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 7:27 PM
> To: Loa Andersson; mpls-tp at ietf.org; pwe3 at ietf.org; ccamp at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [CCAMP] poll on making
> draft-sprecher-mpls-tp-oam-analysis-07.txt a working group draft
>     As I said earlier, I do not see the point in bringing this document
> forward. I viewed it more as a set of meeting minutes/notes that were held
> by the MEAD team, and as such has served its purpose.
>     --Tom
> On 10/18/09 1:49 PM, "Loa Andersson" <loa at pi.nu> wrote:
>
>
> Working Group,
> the authors of draft-sprecher-mpls-tp-oam-analysis-07.txt have
> asked that the draft is adopted as an mpls working group document.
> This mail starts a two week poll on making the draft a working group
> document. Send a mail to the mpls-tp at ietf.org mailing list, indicating
> "yes/support" or "no/do not support".
> Comments on the content should be sent to the same mailing list with
> a different subject line.
> The poll ends Fri Oct 30.
> Loa and George
> MPLS working group co-chairs
>
>
> --
> Principal Architect - 21CN Networks
> _______________________________________________
> CCAMP mailing list
> CCAMP at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
> _______________________________________________
> pwe3 mailing list
> pwe3 at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pwe3 mailing list
> pwe3 at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-tp mailing list
> mpls-tp at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-tp
>
>