Hi Adrian,

Yes for all three IDs.

Regards,

Dan

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Adrian Farrel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 10:08 PM
Subject: [Pce] Poll on three new working group I-Ds


> Hi,
> 
> Resulting from the discussions in Montreal, we would like to take your 
> opinions on the adoption of three I-Ds as working group drafts.
> 
> draft-bitar-zhang-interas-pcecp-reqs-01.txt
> This draft sets out the requirements for PCEP in an inter-AS scenario. It 
> has been refined considerably over the last couple of iterations and is now 
> limited to just the requirements for this situation. We may need to do more 
> work on it as a WG document, but the authors and chairs believe it is in 
> good enough shape to be the basis of the WG work.
> 
> draft-bryskin-pce-policy-enabled-path-comp-02.txt
> Policy forms part of the PCE architecture, and this document fleshes out the 
> details of the use of policy in a PCE context.
> There was some discussion in Montreal about whether to wait to include 
> details of policy for recovery path computation, but the chairs feel that 
> this scenarion (and any other relevant scenarios) can be safely added once 
> the I-D is a working group draft. Further, there was support from the 
> service providers in the room in Montreal for adopting this I-D.
> 
> draft-vasseur-pce-brpc-00.txt
> This draft describes an application procedure for PCE in the inter-domain 
> case.
> There has been some discussion of this draft on the mailing list resulting 
> in the request for a few clarifications of scope and procedure, and also an 
> explicit mention of the Path Key ID option.
> Since JP is the lead author on this work, I think that the correct procedure 
> is for JP to make a quick update before this becomes a WG I-D, but while we 
> are polling I would like to ask your opinion on this I-D assuming that JP 
> makes the necessary changes.
> 
> Simple Yes and No answers will do, but reasons are always helpful.
> 
> Cheers,
> Adrian
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pce mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
> 

_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Reply via email to