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

From: "Nurit Sprecher" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 15:54:45 +0200

Hi,
In general I agree with you. However note that we had discussions on the
requirement draft and we have a good idea on the requirements for the TE
MS PWs. Of course the draft may still be changed, tuned, extended, but
we have a strong base to work on, otherwise I don't think we would
accept it is WG document.
Best regards,
Nurit.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Davie [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 3:53 PM
To: Nurit Sprecher; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [PWE3] draft-raggarwa-rsvpte-pw-01.txt

--On Thursday, March 24, 2005 1:51 PM +0200 Nurit Sprecher 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> Hi Davie,
> The requirement draft has just been accepted as a WG document. That is
> the requirements as stated right now (together with the remarks that
> were given) in the draft are acceptable.

I don't believe that adoption of a requirements draft as WG item in any
way 
indicates that every requirement in the draft is agreed to by the WG. It
is 
only a starting point.

Bruce