On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 6:13 AM, Xuxiaohu <xuxia...@huawei.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your comment. Note that it’s WG adoption call rather than WGLC. > If I understand it correctly, as long as it’s worthwhile to provide > fine-grained load-balancing of Softwire service traffic by leveraging the > UDP tunnels, the WG should adopt it and then work on it, e.g., addressing > those issues as you mentioned. > The WG shouldn't adopt it unless there is a clear motivation for doing so, and no existing solutions to the same problem. That is the case you need to make. What various people are saying is that they don't believe you have made that case. That is how it appears to me as well.
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
