The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:current> msg00049



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

[mpls] [PWE3] FW: Changes to PW ACH Channel Typeallocation policy

  • From: "BUSI ITALO" <Italo.Busi@alcatel-lucent.it>
  • Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2008 09:56:27 +0200
  • Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org, BOCCI Matthew <Matthew.Bocci@alcatel-lucent.com>, mpls@ietf.org, ccamp@ietf.org, mpls-tp@ietf.org, pwe3@ietf.org, Shahram Davari <davari@tpack.com>
  • Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com
  • X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com
  • X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Oct 2008 07:56:17.0454 (UTC)FILETIME=[83F72CE0:01C9252D]
  • X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 155.132.188.84
  • X-Spam-Flag: NO
  • X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35]

Stewart,

as far as I can understand from RFC 4446, a vendor can be prevented
implementing proprietary innovative features by simply disapproving its
codepoint request.

Italo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stewart Bryant [mailto:stbryant@cisco.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 9:11 AM
> To: BUSI ITALO
> Cc: Shahram Davari; BOCCI Matthew; pwe3@ietf.org; 
> mpls-tp@ietf.org; mpls@ietf.org; ccamp@ietf.org; l2vpn@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [mpls] [PWE3] FW: Changes to PW ACH Channel Type 
> allocation policy
> 
> BUSI ITALO wrote:
> > I also support option 2
> >
> > The requirement is to allow a vendor to implement 
> proprietary innovative
> > features.
> >
> > Italo
> >
> >   
> Italo
> 
> How does option 1 prevent a vendor implementing proprietary 
> innovative 
> features?
> 
> Stewart
> 
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls