Subject: should I hold off on updating the CL framework draft?

From: Curtis Villamizar <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 15:16:44 -0400

RTGWG,

We are in a poll on "Composite Link Framework in Multi Protocol Label
Switching (MPLS)", aka the CL Framework (currently
draft-so-yong-rtgwg-cl-framework-05, would be updated to -06).

Are there any objections from the WG to updating the CL framework from
the current -05 version to an -06 version to reflect the discussion on
the WG mailing list and making those updates during the poll?  

BTW- Primary participants in the WG mailing list discussion were
Iftekhar Hussain, Lucy Yong, and myself.  Kireeti Kompella made
comments in response to Iftekhar, but regarding requirements implied
by the CL Framework.

Curtis

---

From: Curtis Villamizar <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 10:22:10 -0400

There were no objections.  Therefore
draft-so-yong-rtgwg-cl-framework-06 has been submited.

The draft is at
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-so-yong-rtgwg-cl-framework/

Diifs are at
http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-so-yong-rtgwg-cl-framework-06

Briefly diffs are:

  date and version number

  Consolidate text on IP and LDP.  Split "Section 4.2.4. Accounting
  for IP and LDP Traffic " into "Section 4.2.4. Accounting for IP and
  LDP Traffic" and "Section 4.2.5. IP and LDP Limitations".

  Numerous minor wording changes.

  Added summary list to bottom of "Section 2.1. Flow Identification"

  Consolidated discussion of scalability, moving text to one place and
  using cross reference rather than partial duplication.

  Say a little about what a "large network" is (provider network).

  Remove "Section 7.2.2. Component Group Metric".  Move text (one
  paragraph) into "Section 7.2.1. Component Link Grouping".

  Add cross references back from subsections 7.2.x (in "Section
  7.2. Required Document Coverage") listing the set of requirement
  groups that each suggested document focuses on and list the set of
  requirement groups that must be considered.

  Change Ning So's affiliation.

  Change Lucy Yong's address.

  Brief addition to acknowledgements.

These diffs were already sent to the RTGWG mailing list so there
should be no surprises.

Curtis

------- Forwarded Message

Message-Id: <[email-masked]>
To: RTGWG <[email-masked]>
cc: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]
Subject: should I hold off on updating the CL framework draft?
From: Curtis Villamizar <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 15:16:44 -0400

RTGWG,

Curtis

------- End of Forwarded Message