Re: Proposed WG Draft - draft-gmpls-ethernet-arch-00.txt

[Ben Niven-Jenkins <benjamin.niven-jenkins@bt.com>]

On 25/1/08 11:36, "PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri"
<Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel-lucent.be> wrote:
> this is not what i say. i am concerned in stating beforehand
> RFC 3945 (GMPLS Arch.) is not applicable to Ethernet. Why the
> doc. does not deliver any tangible explanation.

OK, now I understand your concerns.  So, I think we're (you, me & the docs
authors) are actually in agreement in our thinking, just maybe that the
original wording in the doc was not the best.  I'm sure the authors can do
some wordsmithing once it is a WG doc.

> so you seem to agree with me. departing from RFC 3945 makes
> little sense. it would have been interesting to see the doc
> delivering a FIT of the GMPLS protocol arch. blocks and, in
> particular, label allocation and distribution for Ethernet.

Departing from RFC3945 for the sake of it makes little sense.  If there is a
justifiable reason to depart then that is fine IMO.

Ben