Re-,
On 4/30/2012 Monday 4:03 AM, Lee, Yiu wrote:
Well, even the WG decided to go with MAP, we would still need to coin toss
between MAP-T and MAP-E, wouldn't we?
May I share your concern.
Cheers,
Jacni
On 4/26/12 10:50 AM, Jan Zorz @ go6.sij...@go6.si wrote:
On 4/26/12 11:50 AM, Mark
My concern is MAP isn't a single solution. Operators still need to make a
choice between E and T because they are not compatible.
From: Jacni Qin ja...@jacni.com
Date: Wednesday, May 2, 2012 9:03 PM
To: Yiu L. LEE yiu_...@cable.comcast.com
Cc: Jan Zorz @ go6.si j...@go6.si, softwires@ietf.org
Re-,
On 5/3/2012 Thursday 10:18 AM, Lee, Yiu wrote:
My concern is MAP isn't a single solution. Operators still need to
make a choice between E and T because they are not compatible.
Fully agree, and IMHO, there have been lots of compromise in the design
of MAP algorithm to accommodate both E
