Yes, indeed, there wasn't much progress since last meeting and hence no
meeting scheduled for Montreal. My day job reintegration process has been
more demanding than expected, which contributed to the situation. I need
to apologize for this. I expect the situation to improve after Montreal.
As for these drafts, I will review the discussion and follow-up on it on
the mailing list this week.
Monday, June 12, 2006, 2:22:11 PM, Olivier Bonaventure wrote:
> Alex, Bill,
> During the last meeting, there were discussions about several drafts.
>> RTGWG Meeting Notes
>> Pierre Francois on francois-ordered-fib-01.txt
>> Alex: Where do the authors want to take this?
>> Stewart: When we know more about this and PLSN, we can make a decision
>> Alex: I guess, but since we're close to finishing the Basic IPFRR draft,
>> have to decide if we want to progress it along with some sort of microloop
>> prevention draft. We were looking at Base IPFRR progressing with PLSN. Do
>> we want to reopen that?
>> Stewart: we should do both or subsitute. This would suggest we get better
>> service from the destinations we cannot cover with IPFRR, with oFIB than
>> with PLSN.
>> Alex: What is your proposal?
>> Stewart: we make this a wg doc and then let the wg make a decision.
>> Alex: If you agree that this should become a wg doc, raise hand: @20 yes.
>> If not ready, raise hand: 1. Consensus in the room to make it a wg doc,
>> will take to the mailing list.
>> Scott Bradner: the consensus in the room is "don't give a hoot"
>> Ross: There are always lots of people who haven't read the draft, and don't
>> feel comfortable making a stand.
>> Alex: Okay, I'll discuss with the AD's and get back to the list.
> I was surpised to see that no meeting was scheduled for rtgwg in
> Montreal. I would like to know what is the status of this draft and also
> the outcome of the three requests sent by Stewart Bryant to advanced the
> following drafts as working group items :
> Best regards,
rtgwg mailing list