Hi Lou, Ross Thank you for your response.
Based on emails from you and my understanding, these works should be done in MPLS WG. Yesterday night, we uploaded framework/requirement document to CCAMP/RTGWG and rsvp-te to CCAMP. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fuxh-ccamp-delay-loss-te-framework-00 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fuxh-rtgwg-delay-loss-te-framework-00 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fuxh-ccamp-delay-loss-rsvp-te-ext-00 It doesn't means we are going to violate chairs' decision. As you suggest, we will fix draft name having the word “MPLS” in the title and post to MPLS WG at a later date. We will request time slots to present two documents for the upcoming 81st meeting. So it is a good news for us to have complete solution of latency and loss TE application based on framework/requirement, draft-giacalone-ospf-te-express-path and rsvp-te document. Xihua Fu Lou Berger <[email protected]> 2011-07-05 上午 10:53 收件人 [email protected] 抄送 Acee Lindem <[email protected]>, CCAMP <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, OSPF WG List <[email protected]>, Vishwas Manral <[email protected]> 主题 Re: [CCAMP] [OSPF] draft-giacalone-ospf-te-express-path-01 For now, the framework/requirement and rsvp-te document should be presented in MPLS. Don't worry about the draft names as that can be fixed at a later date. Lou On 7/4/2011 7:15 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > Hi Lou > > Would you like to inform us the decision? > Tonight is the deadline for 00-draft uploading. If chairs decide this > work should be posted to other WGs. So we will post them to a proper WG. > Otherwise we have to post framework/requirement and rsvp-te document to > CCAMP. The work is related both packet (e.g., MPLS) and tdm (e.g., OTN) > > Xihua > > > *Lou Berger <[email protected]>* > > 2011-06-30 下午 08:19 > > > 收件人 > [email protected] > 抄送 > Vishwas Manral <[email protected]>, Acee Lindem > <[email protected]>, CCAMP <[email protected]>, OSPF WG List > <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > 主题 > Re: [CCAMP] [OSPF] draft-giacalone-ospf-te-express-path-01 > > > > > > > > > Xihua, > For at least now, the OSPF work should be done in the > OSPF WG. The > chairs of the various candidate WG are having some off-line discussions > on were the requirements/RSVP work belongs. We should have an answer > for you by early next week. > > Lou > > PS Please don't cc [email protected] on mail you send, it makes the > mail system think your mail is a bounce! > > On 6/29/2011 9:44 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> I have a question to chairs and the authors. Because there are more and >> more documents appearing, we should think about how to move forward >> these work. >> What's your opinion? > >
_______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
