[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (a) Inter-Area, (b) Inter-AS (c) both (d) neither
jerry, progress on inter-area requirements (a) may be done
independently of inter-as (b) but as you said "synergies"
should be also in the loop, keep a global architectural
perspective (of protocols and mechanisms) is of primary
importance (note: also we should probably also take into
account that an internal lsr may have to reach another
area in order to get out of its own as, thus to deliver
e2e inter-as te, we will have cases where the inter-area
solutions will be in the loop, anyway)
"Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS" wrote:
> I agree that we should progress a) and b) independently, but take note of any possible synergies.
> Also, icw item a):
> Sudheer> Should we revive our inter-area drafts now
> Jim> yes, please do.
> Several of us collaborated on multi-area TE requirements a while back: http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf-announce/Current/msg15882.html
> has expired, but is still available at:
> This can be updated and progressed if there is interest.
E-mail : firstname.lastname@example.org
E-mail : email@example.com
Public : http://psg.com/~dpapadimitriou/
Address: Fr. Wellesplein 1, B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium
Phone : +32 3 240-8491