Subject: RE: RE: I-D ACTION:draft-ash-multi-area-te-reqmts-01.txt

From: "Naidu, Venkata" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:44:53 -0500

Jerry:

   my 2 cents...

-> > here are the follow-up questions:
-> >
-> > a. do we need multi-area te?

   Yes!

-> > if yes, then
-> > b. do we need multi-area te requirements?

   Yes, for a unified solution.

-> > if yes, then
-> > c. should we add these requrements to 
-> draft-ietf-restore-hierarchy-00.txt?
-> > if no, then
-> > d. what should we do about multi-area te requirements?

   Place doesn't matter - content matters!

--Venkata Naidu

---

From: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 11:27:34 -0800

Venkata,

>    Yes, for a unified solution.

if a unified solution can't be produced without multi-area te
requirements, then perhaps we could pursue a non-unified
solution...

>    Place doesn't matter - content matters!

Actually what really matters is working code and operational
experience. And it is far from obvious (at least to me) that a
requirements document is going to provide a useful contribution to
either the working code or the operational experience.

yakov.