Re: Continued Poll for Adoption of Ethernet I-Ds

["Ogaki, Kenichi" <ke-oogaki@cn.kddilabs.jp>]

Hi,

Yes to all.

Best regards,
Kenichi

Adrian Farrel wrote:

> Hi,
>
> We have seen some good support for these I-Ds and no objections, but I 
> don't think we have seen anything like the level of support that was 
> evident in the room in Philadelphia. We haven't seen support from more 
> than half of the authors of the documents.
>
> So, please, if you haven't already done so, give an indication of 
> whether or not you support each of these four documents becoming 
> working group drafts. Remember, you can be in favor of some and not 
> other if you like.
>
> Thanks,
> Adrian
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
> To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 9:23 PM
> Subject: Polling for Adoption of Ethernet I-Ds
>
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > >From Philadelphia, we have four candidate I-Ds for adoption as CCAMP 
> > working group documents.
> >
> > Please express your opinions.
> >
> > Note that acceptance of these I-Ds does not mean that the discussion 
> > about the architecture is done. I think we made some progress on that 
> > topic in Philadelphia, and I think the authors took on the task of 
> > making some updates of semantics and for clarity, but I expect the 
> > discussion may go on for a while.
> >
> > draft-imajuku-ccamp-ethernet-gmpls-req-01.txt
> > draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbb-te-02.txt
> > draft-berger-ccamp-gmpls-mef-uni-02.txt
> > draft-berger-ccamp-gmpls-ether-svcs-01.txt
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Adrian