Subject: RE: I-D ACTION:draft-andersson-mpls-g-chng-proc-00.txt

From: "Malcolm Betts" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 08:10:41 -0500

Loa, the from the outside looking in the liaison process and the change
process are closely coupled.  The liaison process is described in ITU-T
Recommendation A.4 and A.5 and in RFC 3356.  

The coupling occurs because the ITU uses the agreed liaison process to
communicate requests to modify IETF protocols based on requirements agreed
by the members of the Study Group (that originated the liaison).  The change
process being proposed requires that this official request from a SDO is
converted into an individuals ID.  The level of agreement in the SDO is
therefore obscured, this process appears to be in conflict with RFC 3356.
The problem is particularly acute when the requirements are to enable (or
enhance) the management of a non IP network to support a non IP client.  If
my understanding of the draft is correct such requests would be rejected by
the IETF.

It is clearly beneficial to the industry if the basic IETF protocols can be
extended to address such applications.  The IETF plays a key role in
ensuring that the integrity of the base protocols is not compromised.

Malcolm Betts

Phone: +1 613 763 7860 (ESN 393)
FAX:   +1 613 763 6608 (ESN 393)
email: [email-masked]

-----Original Message-----
From: Loa Andersson [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 7:33 AM
To: Kireeti Kompella
Cc: Stephen Trowbridge; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-andersson-mpls-g-chng-proc-00.txt
<snip>

I think I've clearly pointed out the limited scope of the change process,
recognized that there is a orthogonal problem on how we treats liasions
coming into the ietf, that the liasion process needs to be documented, and
that we will add text to address the limited intersection of the
change-process and liasion process in order to promote the cooperation with
other SDOs.

/Loa

<snip>

---

From: George Newsome <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 12:32:25 -0500

Malcolm Betts wrote:

> .........

It seems to me that Malcolm and Monica's remarks, and Steve's 
suggestions to improve the usefulness of the document are all heading in 
the right direction.

I would have thought that the IETF understands very well how to make 
changes to its documents, so a new document discussing that aspect seems 
to have little use.

On the other hand, Loa suggested earlier that the liaison process is not 
well understood, so a document describing how the interaction between 
SDO's can work seems very relevant.

It is difficult or impossible to separate out the fact that other SDO's 
are not individuals, and that formal communications (liaison's) are how 
other SDO's communicate with each other. Steve's suggested changes 
address both of these facts, and are thus helpful.

George