I am not sure I agree with you. IESG has repeatedly asked for
a single mandatory method. Otherwise IETF RFCs become an
archive for peoples
implementations.
Both methods solve different problems, thus, they are mandatory.
What are those different problems? As far as I can see they both
solve the same problem which is link/node protection.
For proof just look at PWE3 ATM-ENCAP draft.
I don't know much about IESG process, but I do know that the proof of
the pudding is in the eating.
Proof of what? I said look at this draft to see that there are
4 methods for transporting ATM over mpls, out of which only one method
is mandatory and 3 others are optional. Now what is the relevance
of pudding/eating here?
-Shahram
- Ping