Subject: [teas-3272bis-design-team] existing references in 3272

From: Loa Andersson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 10:08:42 +0100

Folks,

I gone through the all references once.

None the referenced RFCs has been obsoleted.

One reference to an ID

    [DIFF-TE]   Le Faucheur, F., Nadeau, T., Tatham, M., Telkamp, T.,
                Cooper, D., Boyle, J., Lai, W., Fang, L., Ash, J., Hicks,
                P., Chui, A., Townsend, W. and D. Skalecki, "Requirements
                for support of Diff-Serv-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering",
                Work in Progress, May 2001.

is now RFC 4214, I have update that one.

For all the references to non-IETF documents it is possible to find
proof of existence e.g. via a Google search, though some of the points
to books that I'm not sure still is for sale.

What do we do ?

THe is one reference to [MATE]:

    [MATE]      A. Elwalid, C. Jin, S. Low, and I. Widjaja, "MATE: MPLS
                Adaptive Traffic Engineering", Proc. INFOCOM'01, Apr.
                2001.

But there is also an un-published ID:

Internet Engineering Task Force                            Indra Widjaja
                                           Fujitsu Network Communications
INTERNET DRAFT                                             Anwar Elwalid
Expired in six months                     Bell Labs, Lucent Technologies
                                                              August 1998

                 MATE: MPLS Adaptive Traffic Engineering
                     <draft-widjaja-mpls-mate-00.txt>

Do we want to add the ID?

/Loa
-- 

Loa Andersson                        email: [email-masked]
Senior MPLS Expert
Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: +46 739 81 21 64

---

From: Loa Andersson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 10:42:13 +0100

Folks,

One more thing, for RFC 3212 (CR-LDP) the MPLS working group decided not
do to any further development, the preference was RSVP-TE. Do we wantt 
to keep 3212 as a refernce?

/Loa

--

---

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 10:15:01 -0000

Yeah, I think CR-LDP goes unless there is a history section, but I think even then it is an obscure footnote.

A

-----Original Message-----
From: Teas-3272bis-design-team <[email-masked]> On Behalf Of Loa Andersson
Sent: 29 March 2019 09:42
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [teas-3272bis-design-team] existing references in 3272

Folks,

/Loa

-- 

-- 
Teas-3272bis-design-team mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas-3272bis-design-team

---

From: Jeff Tantsura <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 14:11:00 +0100

+1

Cheers,
Jeff

---

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 11:00:05 +0100

Loa,

For some of the more obscure references, it may be worth looking at whether they are referenced by some of the more obscure text.

If we are going to delete the text then you obviously won't have to worry about the references 😊

A

-----Original Message-----
From: Teas-3272bis-design-team <[email-masked]> On Behalf Of Loa Andersson
Sent: 29 March 2019 09:09
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [teas-3272bis-design-team] existing references in 3272

Folks,

One reference to an ID

What do we do ?

/Loa
--

---

From: Loa Andersson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 22:21:09 +0200

Adrian,

Yes - I agree about have to look at the obscure references once more.
What was intended with the first round was to make sure that the
existing references actually met the requirement on stability.

Meaning if there is a reference in the text that we think should be kept
we are sure that as a reference it is usable. Meaning that the reference
that I updated from "Work in progress" to "RFC" is IK to keep if we want
that, and that is no problem to remove if we want that.

/Loa

--