There were no objections. Therefore draft-so-yong-rtgwg-cl-framework-06 has been submited.
The draft is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-so-yong-rtgwg-cl-framework/ Diifs are at http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-so-yong-rtgwg-cl-framework-06 Briefly diffs are: date and version number Consolidate text on IP and LDP. Split "Section 4.2.4. Accounting for IP and LDP Traffic " into "Section 4.2.4. Accounting for IP and LDP Traffic" and "Section 4.2.5. IP and LDP Limitations". Numerous minor wording changes. Added summary list to bottom of "Section 2.1. Flow Identification" Consolidated discussion of scalability, moving text to one place and using cross reference rather than partial duplication. Say a little about what a "large network" is (provider network). Remove "Section 7.2.2. Component Group Metric". Move text (one paragraph) into "Section 7.2.1. Component Link Grouping". Add cross references back from subsections 7.2.x (in "Section 7.2. Required Document Coverage") listing the set of requirement groups that each suggested document focuses on and list the set of requirement groups that must be considered. Change Ning So's affiliation. Change Lucy Yong's address. Brief addition to acknowledgements. These diffs were already sent to the RTGWG mailing list so there should be no surprises. Curtis ------- Forwarded Message Message-Id: <[email protected]> To: RTGWG <[email protected]> cc: [email protected] Reply-To: [email protected] Subject: should I hold off on updating the CL framework draft? From: Curtis Villamizar <[email protected]> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 15:16:44 -0400 RTGWG, We are in a poll on "Composite Link Framework in Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS)", aka the CL Framework (currently draft-so-yong-rtgwg-cl-framework-05, would be updated to -06). Are there any objections from the WG to updating the CL framework from the current -05 version to an -06 version to reflect the discussion on the WG mailing list and making those updates during the poll? BTW- Primary participants in the WG mailing list discussion were Iftekhar Hussain, Lucy Yong, and myself. Kireeti Kompella made comments in response to Iftekhar, but regarding requirements implied by the CL Framework. Curtis ------- End of Forwarded Message _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
