[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: GMPLS MIB I-D updates

To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Subject: RE: GMPLS MIB I-D updates
From: "Thomas D. Nadeau" <tnadeau@cisco.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 10:27:03 -0500
Cc: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>, Cheenu Srinivasan <cheenu@paramanet.com>, Joan Cucchiara <jcucchia@CrescentNetworks.com>, ccamp@ops.ietf.org, Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>, Vijay Gill <vijay@umbc.edu>, swallow@cisco.com
In-reply-to: <E16UUZm-000EhK-00@rip.psg.com>
References: <2413FED0DFE6D111B3F90008C7FA61FB0E5F6816@nl0006exch002u.nl.lucent.com>


> > If the MIBs are GMPLS specific
>
>then why are they in the COMMON control and measurement wg?

         I thought that it was decided that all GMPLS extensions to
MPLS were to be done in CCAMP.

         --Tom




------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.

References:
- RE: GMPLS MIB I-D updates
  - From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>
- RE: GMPLS MIB I-D updates
  - From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>

Prev by Date: RE: GMPLS MIB I-D updates
Next by Date: Material for discussion on protection switching
Previous by thread: RE: GMPLS MIB I-D updates
Next by thread: RE: GMPLS MIB I-D updates
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread