adrian
"- Dimitri: Please clarity the use of PCE
- Tomonori: As Adrian said, CCAMP has selected PCE. L1VPN is not requiring
the use of PCE, but recognising the
possiblity of using PCE for P&R"
but this is not what adrian could have said as i've never seen a statement
such as L1VPN recognizes the possibility
of using PCE for P&R ... as there is no CE dual homing discussion since so
far
"Dimitri: It is a timing issue; They have today an OSPF environment and
are willing to deploy quickly.
BGP may be a solution in 4-5 years"
the last part of the message was "No doubt that BGP is a sensible
approach, but if we have to base our timing
by relying on IGP deployment experience, BGP may be the solution of choice
in 4-5 years."
"Yakov: Update on the BGP-based auto-discovery
We don't want to have a new AFI, we just need a new SAFI
New format for l1vpn LNRI"
guess you mean NLRI
"Adrian Farrel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10/04/2006 15:25
Please respond to Adrian Farrel
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject: [L1vpn] Draft minutes uploaded
Hi,
Please review the minutes at
http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/06mar/minutes/l1vpn.html
Comments on the list or to the chairs.
Thanks,
Adrian
_______________________________________________
L1vpn mailing list
L1vpn@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l1vpn
_______________________________________________
L1vpn mailing list
L1vpn@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l1vpn
