RE: IMPORTANT: Strategy for VPN work in IETF

I agree with Loa as well. I believe that there is a lot to be done in L2
space (working with 802.1ad etc...). I don't think forming DTs or focus
groups would help that much.

thanks,
yetik

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Muneyoshi Suzuki [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2003 9:00 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: IMPORTANT: Strategy for VPN work in IETF
> 
> 
> 
> I second Loa.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Muneyoshi Suzuki
> Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corp.
> 
> 
>  > many of the points brought up by Thomas, Jeremy, Ananth and Luyuan
>  > valid.
>  > 
>  > I would agree that if there is like 13 docs that needs to 
> go into IESG
>  > review shortly for the L3VPNs only, this in itself is proof of that
>  > there is an abundance of work to be undertaken in the L3VPN area.
>  > Haven't checked but if there are MIB modules among those docs, one
>  > shouldn't underestimate the amont of work that needs to go into
>  > preparing those docs for IESG review.
>  > 
>  > The amount of work is even larger for the L2VPNs.
>  > 
>  > There seems to a, "if only thinking" around the split. "If 
> only we'd
>  > done this along time ago!" or "It would have been better 
> if we only had
>  > done this from start!".
>  > While I can agree on the sentiment, it is focusing on the 
> wrong problem.
>  > 
>  > We have a situation where we need to speed up the output 
> in this ppvpn
>  > area, I don't think there is an agreement on this?
>  > 
>  > My experience from the mpls wg is that I as a wg chair very often
>  > becomes a bottleneck, solely on reeading and crosschecking 
> capacity. Now
>  > if Alex is proposing to throw more manpower on those tasks 
> in an area
>  > that is understood to be work intensive, he nees support in this!
>  > 
>  > I really think there are separate issues here, but where 
> splitting the
>  > wg could contribute solve more than one, simple by adding 
> fresh blood.
> 
>