Subject: Fwd: [Pce] Feed-back on new WGs documents

From: JP Vasseur <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 07:31:23 -0500

There's a relatively light support of these drafts but no opposition  
and we clearly need MIBs for PCE discovery.
Emile, could you re-publish both I-Ds as WG documents?
Furthermore, I would suggest you to pool the WG on the various  
related items that were discussed in San diego for which you asked  
for WG feed-back.

Thanks.

JP and Adrian.

Begin forwarded message:

> From: JP Vasseur <[email-masked]>
> Date: November 22, 2006 10:01:18 AM EST
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [Pce] Feed-back on new WGs documents
>
> Dear WG,
>
> Could you provide us your feed-back on adopting the two following  
> IDs as a WG documents ?
>
> draft-stephan-pce-tc-mib-00 - Definitions of Textual Conventions  
> for Path Computation Element
>
> draft-stephan-pce-disc-mib-00 - Definitions of Managed Objects for  
> Path Computation Element Discovery Protoocl
>
> Note that other MIB-related IDs are expected (e.g. PCEP, ...).
>
> JP and Adrian.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pce mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce