RE: AD evaluation: draft-ietf-tewg-diff-te-mar-02.txt

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

Not sure why some people think (or that is how I 
perceive your last email) that an AD has any more weight than
other WG members. I have made my opinion clear that I think
that 32 is far too much.

I have asked WG chairs to check this also.

It is best if WG chairs take initiative to drive resolution of
these questions.

Thanks,
Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ina Minei [mailto:ina@juniper.net]
> Sent: vrijdag 9 januari 2004 1:19
> To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
> Cc: Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS; Tewg (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: AD evaluation: draft-ietf-tewg-diff-te-mar-02.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 	Bert,
> 
> 	So can we just agree on 32 "experimental/vendor private"
> numbers starting at 255 and down?
> 
> 			Thank you,
> 
> 				Ina
> 
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, Ina Minei wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > 	Bert,
> >
> > 	I think we both agree :). and in the end it all boils down to
> > experimental vs vendor-private. What I am thinking of
> > is vendor-private numbers, and what you are thinking of is 
> experimental.
> > We are both right. How we decide to solve it is a different issue.
> >
> > 	We can  either: 1) allocate two spaces, one for experimental and
> > one for vendor-private. In that case, 3 should be enough 
> for experimental,
> > but as  for vendor-private more than 3 would be required, 
> for the reason I
> > was  mentioning in the original mail or 2) allocate one 
> bigger space for
> > both experimental and vendor-private. I prefer (2).
> >
> > 	Let's just pick one of the options, and carry it forward. Let me
> > know what you prefer.
> >
> > 			Ina
> >
>