Re: Proposed new working group draft

[Huub van Helvoort <hhelvoort@chello.nl>]

Hello,

I support progressing this document as WG draft,
for the same reasons as mentioned by Greg.

Cheers, Huub.

Greg Bernstein wrote:
=====================
> I support this becoming a WG draft.   I think those interested in 
> VCAT/LCAS will also be interested in the advertising of adaptation 
> capabilities mentioned in the draft.
>
> Greg B.
>
> Adrian Farrel wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Now that the MLN requirements and protocol evaluation have completed 
> > last call with just a couple of comments, and now that we have more or 
> > less reached stability with our liaisons to the ITU-T on this subject, 
> > we need to look for a solutions I-D.
> >
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-papadimitriou-ccamp-gmpls-mrn-extensions-04.txt 
> > has been running for some time and tracking both the requirements and 
> > the lacunae identified by the evaluation draft. It seems that this 
> > provides a good basis for the protocol work in CCAMP even if some 
> > elements might change.
> >
> > Please express your support or otherwise for this I-D to become a WG 
> > draft.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Adrian


--
================================================================
                  http://www.van-helvoort.eu/
================================================================
Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else...