Subject: Re: [PWE3] Should draft-martini-pwe3-iccp-01 be a WG doc?

From: Stewart Bryant <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 12:46:26 +0100

Stewart Bryant wrote:
> The authors of draft-martini-pwe3-iccp-01.txt
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-martini-pwe3-iccp-01.txt
>
> have requested that this become a PWE3 WG document.
>
> Please can you send comments to the list by 20th April
> so that the chairs can judge consensus.
>
> Thanks
>
> Stewart
> _______________________________________________
> pwe3 mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3
>
Reviewing the comments there is clear consensus
that we need a standard method for ICCP.

This is the only draft that has been put forward
to define a mechanism.

There is some concern that transports other
than LDP should be provided, and some
concern that the use of the mechanism should
be generalized to support other types of
PE, and not just PWE3 PEs. However no
such general mechanism has been proposed
in other WGs.

We should accept this as a WG draft, but
it should be written to allow other
transport protocols and in such a way
that the primatives can be applied to
other IETF applications.

Since LDP is the standard method of
signaling PW state, it will usually be
present and it's reuse is therefore advantageous.
Alternative proposals should therefore
be accompanied by appropriate applicability
statements.

Stewart