Jon, My intent wasn't to show support for the draft, just to point out the relationship to the MPLS draft for those of you on the softwires list that may not have been following it. It's really up to the softwires WG to determine if it supports taking on this draft as a work item.
Also, a comment to the draft-xu authors is that both of the draft-xu's should probably cross-reference each other (they don't currently). Cheers, Andy On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 12:20 AM, Jon Steen <[email protected]> wrote: > Andy, > > I would have to agree with Damien in some sense, what other currently > available standards are available to fulfill this need without adding the > extra overhead. Overhead only adds to the proceessing time it takes to > relay the data. > > Jon Steen > > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Andrew G. Malis <[email protected]>wrote: > >> For the benefit of those of you that don't follow the MPLS WG list, this >> draft is closely related to >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-mpls-in-udp-06 , which is the >> subject of a lively discussion there. >> >> Cheers, >> Andy >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Damien Saucez >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Interesting document, have you ever though of LISP to do that? >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Damien Saucez >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Softwires mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lisp mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp >> >> >
_______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
