Thomas, I would question the use of the word 'premise'. I think 'assertion' is much more accurate.
I also have a question for clarification. Do you consider yourself to be a 'vendor' or an 'operator'? Thanks, John Sent from my iPhone > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Thomas Narten > Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 2:18 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: Yakov Rekhter; Kireeti Kompella; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [nvo3] NVO3 charter 1530UK 12April > > Hi Stewart. > > > I do not know whether we need IP, MPLS or both in this case, and > > unfortunately I am not sure how we get firm objective evidence. > > However we need to be careful that on the one hand the charter does > > not preempt an objective decision, and on the other hand does not > > create a mechanism whereby the WG spends a lot of time on technology > > to support minority deployments. > > I am very much concerned about this. I know that this point is not > shared by all, but for the DC folk I've talked to (and there are others > I've talked to that say *exactly* the same thing), MPLS/BGP is simply a > non-starter. > > I know that me saying that won't convince those that disagree with this > premise. > > One of initial deliverables of the WG is to do requirements gathering > and a gap analysis. We will have the above conversation then for sure. > > But I am also worried that the voices of vendors could easily drown out > the voices of operators. The IETF gets little enough direct > particpation from operators as it is. > > > The specific problem is with the ambiguity of the word "or" since it > > may bind us to doing both even if the evidence supports the need for > > only one (of type currently unknown), or it may force us to choose > > when the market is split and we need to support both. > > > My hope was that "layer 3" could be taken to include IP and MPLS in > > such a way as to allow us to make a more considered decision of {IP, > > MPLS, IP and MPLS} when we have more evidence. > > IMO, saying L3 is enough. > > Thomas > > _______________________________________________ > nvo3 mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
