Hi, If we must... > I cannot find section 1.1 or the text "one OAM solution" in the PDF version of RFC 5317. I think Loa meant Section 1.1 of draft-sprecher-mpls-tp-oam-considerations and its reference to RFC 5317 (not Section 1.1 of the RFC itself). > The last paragraph of section 1 states: > > In the case of a conflict between the summary and the > slides, the slides take precedence. Since those slides were the > basis of an important agreement between the IETF and the ITU-T, it > should further be noted that in the event that the PDF version of the > slides differs from those emailed to ITU-T and IETF management on 18 > April 2008 by the co-chairs of the JWT, the emailed slides take > precedence. > > The full quote from slide 12 is: >> This presentation is a collection of assumptions, discussion points and >> decisions that the combined group has had during the months of March and >> April, 2008 >> This represents the *agreed upon starting point* for the technical >> analysis of the T-MPLS requirements from the ITU-T and the MPLS >> architecture to meet those requirements > > I must also remind you that the JWT did not have the power to make decision > for the ITU or IETF No, it didn't. It had the power to make recommendations. Those recommendations were accepted by both the IETF and the ITU-T. The ITU-T communicated its acceptance of the recommendations in a liaison to the IETF. This is documented in RFC5317 as: These JWT recommendations were accepted by ITU-T management [MPLS-TP1]. Thanks, Adrian _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf