RE: Last Call <draft-sprecher-mpls-tp-oam-considerations-01.txt> (The Reasons for Selecting a Single Solution for MPLS-TP OAM) to Informational RFC

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Snipped, comment inline

> >
> > You are making a point on which I picked earlier because it is stated
> in the
> > document as well. In case there are multiple solutions, documenting,
> but at
> > the same time discouraging the other one has happened before. Why is
> this not
> > possible in this case? Make one the default, the other optional with
> a big
> > red warning sign.
> >
> > Best,
> > Rolf
> 
> This is indeed possible in this case. It has been privately suggested
> multiple times, but
> I agree that this should have been publicly suggested as well (and thus
> I guess that I am
> publicly suggesting it now).
> 
> Ross
[JD] 

How does the IETF put a big red warning sign on a document produced by another standards body?

> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@xxxxxxxx
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]