Hi, I support the publication of the draft as an informational RFC. This is a good example of providing an avenue for debate and then agreeing to a consensus on single solution and documenting it as a reference. The debate in SDOs has been on for a long time and every time I only get one or two examples of how a provider has deployed the alternative solution and hence it becomes mandatory for all SDOs to comply. To me those are bad choices made by people cognizant of the issues. These are the risks you take when you deploy pre-standard technology and have to rip it or migrate to standards based technology. Just because one or two providers deployed it does not mean it becomes mandatory on the rest of the world. The last time I checked there are more than 500 providers in the world. One solution is all that is needed for an IOT and two solutions are very expensive from a vendor point of view and from a provider point of view. I am sure all vendors and providers agree. From a vendor point of view they are expensive to build and from a provider point of view managing two domains is not easy. Now, no one is stopping people from inventing another protocol that looks a lot like MPLS and behaves a lot like MPLS with "better OAM" characteristics and then standardizing that protocol. I will fully support that protocol except that it cannot be called MPLS. It is a new protocol. Regards, Azhar Sayeed Cisco Systems Inc. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf