Re: draft-ietf-mpls-in-udp was RE: gre-in-udp draft (was: RE: [tsvwg] Mi

> Because they specify zero UDP checksums,
> I oppose publication of draft-ietf-mpls-in-udp in its current form
> I oppose tsvwg adoption of draft-yong-tsvwg-gre-in-udp-encap in its current 
> form.
> I oppose the IETF lisp documents.
lloyd,

i think i understand your position.  but i disagree with preventing wg
adoption of draft-yong-tsvwg-gre-in-udp-encap, mainly because i strongly
see wg adoption as how we get to discuss and work on a document, not as
approval of the document.  as david said, i think we need to discuss it
so we can decide if it should be fixed.  to do so, we have to adopt it.

randy

pgpVV41JBVsHB.pgp
Description: PGP signature