Because the ITU cannot consent the draft without the code points.
The ITU knows exactly that the standard work on CR-LDP is discontinued. Steve may correct me if I am mistaken.
Regards;
Osama Aboul-Magd
ATI Strategic Standards and Protocols
Nortel Networks
P.O. Box 3511, Station C
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
K1Y-4H7
Tel: +1 613 763 5827
e.mail:osama@nortelnetworks.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Loa Andersson [mailto:loa@pi.se]
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 12:26 PM
To: Aboul-Magd, Osama [CAR:1A00:EXCH]
Cc: Adrian Farrel; iesg@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org; Steve Trowbridge (E-mail)
Subject: Re: CORRECTION: Last Call: CR-LDP Extensions for ASON to Informat ional
Osama,
sorry our mails crossed each other on the wire. I see your
point, but doi not really understand why you need the actual
code points to reach consensus - as long as you know you will
get them?
But, I will not try to stop publishing the draft - as long as the
note on cr-ldp not scheduled for further development is added.
/Loa
Osama Aboul-Magd wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
>
> The ITU is scheduled to consent G.7713.3 by the end of the month. In
> order for this to happen we need the IANA code points, and this is the
> only purpose of this draft.
>
> I hope now you see the urgency of this draft.
>
> Regards;
>
> Osama Aboul-Magd
> ATI Strategic Standards and Protocols
> Nortel Networks
> P.O. Box 3511, Station C
> Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
> K1Y-4H7
> Tel: +1 613 763 5827
> e.mail:osama@nortelnetworks.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:afarrel@movaz.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 12:20 PM
> To: Loa Andersson
> Cc: iesg@ietf.org; Aboul-Magd, Osama [CAR:1A00:EXCH]; ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: CORRECTION: Last Call: CR-LDP Extensions for ASON to
> Informational
>
> > trying to understand what you are saying - it seems like you are
> > implying that there is no consensus with in ITU on how to progress
> > this, and that therefore would be premature for IETF to publish
> > this as an informational RFC. Correct?
>
> I'm not quite saying that.
> I am saying that it sounds to me from the discussion that the ITU has
> not yet
> reached consent. It seemed to me that if the draft is intended to
> document the
> ITU preferences as informational, it would be as well to wait until the
> ITU has
> fully signed off. I don't see any rush for this.
>
> > Anyhow - I think it would be appropriate to add a note clarifying that
> > IETF will not progress cr-ldp beyond Proposed Standard.
>
> Adrian
>
>
--
Loa Andersson
Mobile +46 739 81 21 64
Email loa@pi.se