Hi Alia, Support for exactly these reasons.
Regards, Jeff -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John E Drake Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 12:27 PM To: Alia Atlas; [email protected] Subject: RE: opinions on adoption of draft-shand-remote-lfa as a WG draft Alia, I support the WG adopting draft-shand-remote-lfa. It provides a straightforward, low cost, and effective extension to LFAs. Thanks, John Sent from my iPhone >-----Original Message----- >From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf >Of Alia Atlas >Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 9:59 AM >To: [email protected] >Subject: opinions on adoption of draft-shand-remote-lfa as a WG draft > >draft-shand-remote-lfa was presented favorably this last IETF. There >is known IPR associated with it on file ( >https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1770/ ) This draft presents a >solution for IP/LDP fast-reroute that does not guarantee 100% coverage >but can substantially improve coverage over LFAs. > >We would like to initiate a WG poll to determine whether to adopt >draft- shand-remote-lfa. >We are, of course, interested in opinions and reasoning rather than >simple yes/no. > >Thanks, >Alia >_______________________________________________ >rtgwg mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
