On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Paul Francis <[email protected]> wrote: > Is it ok if I make a few changes/fixes and then post that with the new > naming?
s'okay by me. > > From: > Christopher Morrow <[email protected]> > To: > Paul Francis <[email protected]> > Cc: > [email protected], [email protected] > Date: > 05/20/2009 06:38 PM > Subject: > Re: [GROW] Virtual Aggregation as GROW working group item > > > > On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 7:07 AM, Paul Francis <[email protected]> wrote: >> Christopher Morrow wrote: >> >>> >>> Re: [GROW] Virtual Aggregation as GROW working group item >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> I THINK all that's required is a consensus that the doc should be >>> homed in 'some group' (call it grow-wg for this discussion) and then >>> to officially adopt it as such (via chairs sending the requested doc >>> forward as an accepted WG doc, where it gets renamed from >>> draft-paul-blah to draft-grow-blah)... >>> >>> Are there any folks attempting to block this as a work-item for Grow? >> >> If there are such people, I don't think they will come out until we take >> the next step here. >> >> So, I suggest that we go ahead and call these grow-wg accepted > documents, >> and issue them under the grow name. > > Agreed, it's been ~3wks since the last note on VA to grow, with no > folks piping up saying otherwise, could you re-send your doc to the > editor with the proper naming? > > -Chris > >>> >>> -Chris >>> >>> > adopting this work. If the WG wants to do this, and if the chairs >> want some >>> > help dealing with any procedural obstacles, I am happy to help. >>> > >>> > Paul Francis wrote: >>> >> >>> >> From: >>> >> Paul Francis <[email protected]> >>> >> To: [email protected] >>> >> Date: 04/24/2009 05:01 PM >>> >> Subject: [GROW] Virtual Aggregation as GROW working group item >>> >> Sent by: [email protected] >>> >> >>> >> Gang, >>> >> >>> >> I would like to start the discussion of making Virtual Aggregation, >> which >>> >> I presented at the GROW meeting in SF, a working group item. >>> >> >>> >> A new version of the document has been posted, which mainly consists >> of >>> >> minor clarifications from folks who make up an expanded author list >> (Zhang, >>> >> Jen, and Raszuk). It is at >>> >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-francis-intra-va-01.txt. >>> >> >>> >> Note that there are two companion documents associated with this, > one >> each >>> >> on the specifics of MPLS and IP-in-IP tunnels in support of VA. >> These >>> >> have not been updated, though we expect them to be soon. (These are >> at >>> >> http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-francis-va-tunnels-mpls-00.txt and >>> >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-xu-va-tunnels-gre-00.txt >>> >> respectively) >>> >> >>> >> I think that there are mainly two things to discuss: >>> >> >>> >> 1. What additional documentation, if any, is needed (requirements, >>> >> scenarios, MIB, ....)? >>> >> 2. What should the status of the produced RFCs be (informational, >> BCP, >>> >> standard)? >>> >> >>> >> Regarding the first, I do think that a requirements/scenarios >> document is >>> >> a good idea, but would like to hear opinions. >>> >> >>> >> Regarding the second, there are arguments for and against each type. >>> >> Strictly speaking no protocol changes are needed (except for a case >>> >> involving GRE tunnels with key values, which require an extended >> communities >>> >> attribute to convey the key info). So informational or BCP could >> both work. >>> >> I'm inclined towards BCP, but would like to hear opinions. Even >> possibly >>> >> we could start this as a working group item without making this >> decision >>> >> just yet. >>> >> >>> >> Thanks all, >>> >> >>> >> PF >>> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> GROW mailing list >>> >> [email protected] >>> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > GROW mailing list >>> > [email protected] >>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> GROW mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow >> >> > > > > _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
