Subject: comment on draft-fenner-zinin-rtg-standard-reqts-00

From: JP Vasseur <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2005 07:01:40 +0200

Hi,

I'll provide more specific comments in a separate email but at a high  
level I found this ID quite useful and very welcome. Just a quick  
feed-back on one specific aspect discussed in the meeting yesterday:  
the number of required implementations for PS.

I would personally prefer to see one implementation required for PS.

Now, if two implementations are required then I found this a bit  
inconsistent with the absence of requirement for operational  
experience: in practice, if two implementations exist, it is very  
likely that the protocol will be deployed, thus operational  
experience would exist.

Thus,

My preferred option:

for PS:
Implementation =1
Operational experience=No

or

Implementation =2
Operational experience=existent (at least minimal)

Thoughts ?

JP.

_______________________________________________
routing-discussion mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion