Re: Single vs many solution(s)

Luyuan,

> 
> I'd like to support the three main solutions for L2 VPNs:
> draft-lasserre-vkom pella-ppvpn-vpls, draft-kompella-ppvpn-vpls,
> draft-radoaca-ppvpn-gvpls,(and possibly others) to become PPVPN
> WG documents. Each solution has its own merits, and may satisfy
> different needs for the providers. It is conceivable that all so
> lutions get deployed by different providers (indeed, this seems to
> be what is h appening), and will eventually coexist. I think the
> PPVPN WG should define the solutions and then let the market decide.

Agreed. In fact, I don't quite understand why some folks on this
list insist that the IETF should be in the business of making
business decisions (e.g., selecting a particular solution) for the
Service Providers ? Aren't Service Providers competent enough, and
know better their business needs than the IETF ?

Yakov.