I think it is unfortunate that we are in a situation where such a document has
utility. But ultimately it does.
Therefore I support the publication of draft-sprecher...
D
MPLS Working Group,
Please be aware of the IETF last call as shown below. The document was
presented for publication as an individual RFC with IETF consensus and
AD sponsorship.
This draft is clearly close and relevant to the work you do, but after
discussing with the chairs I came to the conclusion that it does not
comment on the technical or process decisions of the MPLS working
groups, and it does not attempt to make any technical evaluations or
definitions within the scope of the MPLS working group. It is more of
a philosophical analysis of the way the IETF approaches the "two
solutions" problem with special reference to MPLS-TP OAM.
Thus, I am accepting the document as AD Sponsored rather than running
it through the MPLS working group. My reasoning is that the working
group has got plenty to do working on technical issues without being
diverted into wider IETF philosophy.
As an AD Sponsored I-D it is subject to a four week IETF last call.
That is plenty of opportunity for everyone to comment and express
their views. Please send your comments to the IETF mailing list as
described below, or (in exceptional circumstances) direct to the IESG.
Thanks,
Adrian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf