RE: WG Consensus Call: draft-swallow-gmpls-overlay-00.txt

["Hamid Ould-Brahim" <hbrahim@nortelnetworks.com>]

It seems there are two components in this discussion:

a) Progress a draft that describes from procedure point of view 
   how GMPLS protocols as defined in ietf can be used to build 
   an overlay model, and by the same token correct a misperception 
   that GMPLS can only be used for a peer model.

b) The relationship of the overlay draft to the OIF-UNI
   spec. So far I saw four proposals

    1- Explain in the overlay draft the difference between
       this draft and OIF-UNI

    2- Submit the OIF-UNI as an internet-draft and discuss
       it side by side with the overlay draft.

    3- Leave OIF-UNI for OIF (since it was developed in that
       context) and just move on with the overaly draft in 
       the IETF.
  
    4- "DeUni-nize" OIF-UNI to make it look like overlay draft
       (I suppose this is not an option but anyway... ;-))

I think b) should not stop a) from progressing since it is
natural to describe how GMPlS protocols can be used to provide
an overlay deployment scenario regardless of OIF-UNI discussions
(this doesn't mean b) should not be discussed...).
 
Hamid.
 
> 
> 
> I agree.
> 
> Amy Wang
> 
> "Ong, Lyndon" wrote:
> 
> > Hi Folks,
> >
> > Although there is obviously a lot of interest in
> > the overlay draft, there is also a lot of debate
> > about its relationship to the OIF UNI specification.
> >
> > Since the UNI is already out, can the overlay
> > draft be enhanced with some wording that explains
> > fairly clearly how it differs from the UNI?
> > This could help clear up the issue and avoid
> > future repeats of the discussion.
> >
> > BTW, it's a bit late but I withdraw my comment on
> > the voting in Atlanta, others clearly had a better
> > count than I did!
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Lyndon Ong
> 
> 
>