Tom, > Documentation is fine, but if it comes from a WG isn't it then an endorsed > approach unless some language is explicitly added to the draft?
Remember, this poll is for WG adoption, not publication. Once the draft has been adopted by the WG, the WG can then add whatever caveat language it wishes to the draft so that it's very clear that this approach has limitations (already in the last paragraph of section 1 and all over section 4), the purpose of the draft is to document a particular usage of the existing L3VPN protocol set, and that there are other standards-based approaches that are/will be standardized by the WG. So I'm in favor of WG adoption, so that the WG can make sure that these caveats are clear in the informational draft. Cheers, Andy
