Re: Single vs many solution(s)

Yakov,

I don't have the power to require that IESG do or don't do anything.
What I can do is to send a specification to the IESG asking them to
review it and publish as an RFC, that is what any wg chair can do.

But I can send an humble request ;)

IESG,

the ppvpn wg group has an ID describing a solution for the L2VPN space 
based
on MP-BGP as a signaling protocol, and also an ID describing a VPN 
membership
discovery mechanism based on BGP.

We have been informed by our ADs that IESG have concerns relating to the 
use of
BGP in this context. To simplify the future work in the wg it would be
useful to have those concerns documented.

/Loa

PS

Is this "enough"?


Yakov Rekhter wrote:
> Loa,
> 
> 
>>Hamid,
>>
>>I think that is wishful thinking. I know that there are issues with
>>using bgp (kkompella) from several ADs including at least Alex.
> 
> 
> Just saying that "there are issues" isn't enough - "the several
> ADs" who have these issues need to document them, and then discuss
> it in an open forum (WG mailing list) to see whether these "issues"
> are of any practical significance.
> 
> Yakov.
> 
> P.S. So far we've seen Alex raising the issues he has with using BGP,
> and Pedro addressing them...
> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
/Loa

mobile + 46 739 81 21 64
email: [email protected]