RE: Single vs many solution(s)

> From: Yakov Rekhter [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, May 12, 2003 1:08 PM
> Subject: 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.
> 

I don't think the IETF is making business decisions. Vendors are free to develop proprietary solutions and service providers are free to deploy them. However, a standards body should develop one solution as THE standard.

In general, large Service Providers have always insisted on standards-based solutions. Superficially, it may seem attractive to have several solutions to choose from, but in the end, I think the industry as a whole is better off  with clear, unambigious standards.

By the way, Service Providers are involved in the standards process. Why do we need to wait for their buying decisions to know what they want?

Peter

> 
>