Subject: RE: draft-raggarwa-rsvpte-pw-01.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 18:34:13 -0000

I also support this on the principle that there ought to be a common
signalling solution that can be used in both co-cs and co-ps modes for
trail set-up/take-down.  And this really should be client independent,
ie one does not want layer network functional components (such as
signalling or OAM say) that are client specific.

regards, Neil

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On 
> Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
> Sent: 23 March 2005 14:37
> To: Stewart Bryant; pwe3
> Subject: Re: [PWE3] draft-raggarwa-rsvpte-pw-01.txt
> 
> 
> I support.
> Adrian
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Stewart Bryant" <[email-masked]>
> To: "pwe3" <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 11:31 AM
> Subject: [PWE3] draft-raggarwa-rsvpte-pw-01.txt
> 
> 
> > 
> > At IETF62 the authors of
> > 
> > Setup and Maintenance of Pseudowires using RSVP-TE 
> > ftp://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-raggarwa-rsvpte-pw-01.txt
> > 
> > asked for the draft to become a WG draft.
> > 
> > What is the view of members of the PWE3 WG?
> > 
> > Stewart
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > pwe3 mailing list
> > [email-masked]
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3
> > 
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pwe3 mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3
>