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

[Ina Minei <ina@juniper.net>]

	Bert,

	Nobody else seems to care about this issue, or at least they are
not expressing an opinion on the list, so this is why I was carrying on
this email thread. I personally would like to see the issue closed and
the draft moved forward.

	This issue is not such a big one, so let's not spend too much
time on it. So far there are two proposals: 3 numbers or 32 numbers.
I have explained why I think 3 is not enough, and you have explained why
you think 32 is too much.

	Let's propose 16 and put it to vote on the list and be done with
it. Perhaps the WG chairs can help with this?

			Ina

On Fri, 9 Jan 2004, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:

> 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
> > >
> >
>