Subject: Re: WGLC on draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-09

From: Alia Atlas <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:53:16 -0400

The WGLC on draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-09 is long since done.  I
apologize for the delay.
We will work on progressing the updated draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-10.

I'd encourage feedback on draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-framework and
draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-use-cases.  I expect that
we'll be doing a WG Last Call on at least one before Berlin.

Alia

On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Alia Atlas <[email-masked]> wrote:

> This is to start a working group last call on
> draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-09.
> The WGLC will conclude on March 15; extra time is given to include the
> IETF meeting.
>
> Please read and send comments.
>
> Thanks,
> Alia & Alvaro
>

---

From: Curtis Villamizar <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:31:42 -0400

In message <[email-masked]>
Alia Atlas writes:
 
> apologize for the delay.  We will work on progressing the updated
> draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-10.

Horray!  Been busy perhaps?

> we'll be doing a WG Last Call on at least one before Berlin.

The CL Use Cases is a fairly quick read.  I would appreciate comments
on that document in particular.  It is purely informational, but as
long as the information is accurate (and useful) we could progress
this document.

CL Framework will be updated now that we have settled on a set of
documents for delay and jitter.  These are the soon to be updated
draft-atlas-mpls-te-express-path,
draft-ietf-ospf-te-metric-extensions, and
draft-previdi-isis-te-metric-extensions.  Other than that (and RFC6790
no longer being a draft), very little is expected to change for now.

CL Use Cases is farther along and it is easier to focus on one
document at a time.  Comments on either document would be greatly
appreciated, but if you have limited time, CL Use Cases first pleast.

Curtis