Subject: [mpls] Should we split draft-bryant-mpls-synonymous-flow-labels into arch and application

From: Stewart Bryant <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 16:50:17 +0100

At the last IETF the question arose as to what the correct
document structure should be for the synonymous
label work.

The core draft is: draft-bryant-mpls-synonymous-flow-labels
which is a mixture pure SFL work and RFC6374 applications
work.

My inclination is to split the draft in two to separate the
SFL architecture from the RFC6374 application. However I
would like to take the sense of the WG on this.

I know that there needs to be more work on requirements
and will do a word by word review of that text and make proposals
and of course review comments on any of these texts are
always welcome.

- Stewart