Hi,

This document supports the WTP establishes data tunnels with different Access 
Routers (ARs), which may belong to different Virtual Network Operators (VNOs).
The slides are available: 
https://tools.ietf.org/agenda/92/slides/slides-92-opsawg-4.pdf
Your questions and comments are appreciated.

Thanks,
Jianjie

> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: OPSAWG [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 Warren Kumari
> 发送时间: 2015年4月11日 1:09
> 收件人: [email protected]
> 主题: [OPSAWG] Another CAPWAP document
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Please take a look at "CAPWAP Control and Data Channel Separation for
> Multi-provider Scenario"
> (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-you-opsawg-capwap-separation-for-mp-00)
> 
> This document was discussed somewhat at the face to face meeting in Dallas.
> We have discussed this document with our ADs and have decided that it is
> sufficiently different to the CAPWAP ALT Tunnel (which is with the IESG), and
> that ALT Tunnel is sufficiently fgar in the process that we will keep this
> document separate...
> 
> So, please take a look at it, and provide initial feedback We will consider 
> having
> a call for adoption if there is enough evidence of interest....
> 
> W
> --
> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in 
> the
> first place.
> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret 
> at
> having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants.
>    ---maf
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OPSAWG mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

Reply via email to