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

Re: SONET/SDH label agreement for IETF, ITU-T and OIF

To: Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>
Subject: Re: SONET/SDH label agreement for IETF, ITU-T and OIF
From: Siva Sankaranarayanan <ssnarayanan@lucent.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 17:06:18 -0500
Cc: ccamp-wg <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
References: <2FEC2C81634CDB4C9F191943ACCDC624101B89@OCCLUST02EVS1.ugd.att.com> <3C7BAFBA.D3ED2C04@lucent.com>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.2.1) Gecko/20010901

Hi Kireeti,
   I vote for (1).

Siva.

>>Kireeti Kompella wrote:
>>snip
>>
>>>
>>> Let's follow the AD's
>>>suggestion and look for consensus in the WG.
>>>
>>>1) Do you think we should have just a single set of traffic parameters
>>>   and label values for SDH, and none for SONET?
>>>or

References:
- RE: SONET/SDH label agreement for IETF, ITU-T and OIF
  - From: "Brungard, Deborah A, ALASO" <dbrungard@att.com>
- Re: SONET/SDH label agreement for IETF, ITU-T and OIF
  - From: Eve Varma <evarma@lucent.com>

Prev by Date: Re: SONET/SDH label agreement for IETF, ITU-T and OIF
Next by Date: LMP
Previous by thread: Re: SONET/SDH label agreement for IETF, ITU-T and OIF
Next by thread: RE: SONET/SDH label agreement for IETF, ITU-T and OIF
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread