RE: Draft charter for L2VPN - IPLS & ARP Mediation

That is like asking for every draft that
Cisco employee has contributed whether Cisco 
is planning to implement it?

IETF operates on individual contributions
and opinions.

/himanshu

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ali Sajassi [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 4:56 PM
> To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Draft charter for L2VPN - IPLS & ARP Mediation
> 
> 
> 
> >I'd like to see the work in this area - IPLS & ARP Mediation 
> -progressed and
> >documented in a published RFC. They are not the most widely 
> deployed cases,
> >but they do exist and  have real network applications.
> 
> Steven,
> 
> Does Bell South plan to offer VPLS ? If it plans to offer it, 
> then there 
> should be no need for IPLS because VPLS can be considered as 
> a super-set 
> since it covers both switches and routers as CEs and it 
> supports both IP 
> and non-IP traffic. Also inter-operability between IPLS and 
> VPLS is another 
> thing to consider if you plan to offer both !! However, if 
> Bell South plans 
> to offer IPLS in lieu of VPLS and assumes that all the 
> end-points for a 
> transparent LAN service are IPs, then that's a different story.
> 
> -Ali
> 
> 
> 
> 
>