Subject: RE: Proposal to Progress draft-nadeau-pwe3-oam-msg-map-04.txt as a PWE3 WG Item

From: "Andrew G. Malis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 17:31:04 -0500

Neil,

Without re-quoting the email exchange (to save us all some BW and disk 
space), it's clear that you have some technical problems with this draft. 
:-)  However, are you opposed to this becoming a working group draft solely 
on the technical grounds, or because you also feel that it's not a valid WG 
work item because it doesn't fit within the charter and/or because you feel 
that it's not a useful work item?  If your objection is solely technical, 
then it can still become a WG draft, and we can all work towards correcting 
the details.  Personally, I think this fits within the WG charter 
(especially now since the interworking aspects have been removed) and 
provides not just useful, but required, functionality.

Cheers,
Andy

---

From: "W. Mark Townsley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 12:04:27 +0100

Andrew G. Malis wrote:

> space), it's clear that you have some technical problems with this 
> draft. :-)  However, are you opposed to this becoming a working group 
> draft solely on the technical grounds, or because you also feel that 
> it's not a valid WG work item because it doesn't fit within the charter 
> and/or because you feel that it's not a useful work item?  If your 
> objection is solely technical, then it can still become a WG draft, and 
> we can all work towards correcting the details.  Personally, I think 
> this fits within the WG charter (especially now since the interworking 
> aspects have been removed) and provides not just useful, but required, 
> functionality.

Much agreed, Andy.

Neil, your technical input certainly has an avenue for discussion and inclusion 
with this as a WG document. Reviewing your comments,  I'm sure the chairs would 
like to see a better focus on the specific question that was posed for this 
thread in order to weigh your opinion. Please don't make them wade through 
specific technical issues that can be addressed forthwith after the document is 
under the administration of the WG, or whether the PWE3 charter itself needs to 
be turned on end. Those discussions have their place, but not in response to 
this question.

- Mark

> 
> Cheers,
> Andy
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pwe3 mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3
>