On 10/8/13 7:33 AM, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>IMHO, it would make sense to wait maybe until IETF89 to decide about >merging node protect with basic rLFA spec. >I think we could progress quite fast on node protection and two IETF >meetings (88, 89) would be fine to have a good view and where we are on >node protection maturity. Then we may decide if merge is possible or not. >These two meetings would also permit to stabilize the rLFA base spec >details and have consensus on the required level of details that are >missing today. > >I think now it's a bit early to decide ... > >Feedbacks ? especially from chairs ? Hi! I agree that we need to first work on the node protection topic *before* thinking about whether that should be merged onto the "basic rLFA spec". There's not much point in arguing on where the text should go if we haven't agreed on that first. Also, we need to be conscious of the balance of progressing work vs waiting for additional topics to be included in a draft. This is not a statement one way or another, but the estimated timeline above really puts us a year from now. OTOH, the discussions on the "basic spec" are still ongoing (as to this morning) as well. Alvaro. _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
