Re: Possible Shutdown of L3VPN

>
> Thx,
>
> Ice.
>
>
>
>>
>> Ben
>>
>>>
>>> Maria
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: l3vpn-bounces@... [mailto:l3vpn-bounces@...] On Behalf
>>>> Of Ben Niven-Jenkins
>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2012 4:59 AM
>>>> To: Henderickx, Wim (Wim)
>>>> Cc: L3VPN; Stewart Bryant (stbryant)
>>>> Subject: Re: Possible Shutdown of L3VPN
>>>>
>>>> Wim,
>>>>
>>>> On 22 Jan 2012, at 06:11, Henderickx, Wim (Wim) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Why don't we keep the WG open until the WG drafts are finished?
>>>>
>>>> Because there's nothing like a deadline to motivate people :-)
>>>>
>>>> If it's decided to wind the WG down, what I would expect is that it
>>>> wouldn't just happen overnight but that we would produce a 'plan' for
>>>> closure within a reasonable timeframe (say 6 months) where we would aim
>>>> to finish what we have on our plate first, if possible.
>>>>
>>>> Regarding WG drafts, currently we have 3:
>>>> -> draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards, which has just gone through WG LC
>>>> and about to be sent to IESG for publication
>>>> -> draft-ietf-l3vpn-acceptown-community, which we will initiate a WG LC
>>>> on shortly
>>>> -> draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-bidir, which the authors say needs another
>>>> revision before being ready for WG LC
>>>>
>>>> So getting those finished relatively quickly before closure seems
>>>> achievable.
>>>>
>>>> I'd personally also like the combined extranet draft produced before
>>>> closure but again I'd expect that should be possible relatively quickly
>>>> too.
>>>>
>>>> Ben
>>>>
>>>>> We can probably do this on the mailing list and don't need a
>>>> face2face meeting, but as such you keep the WG alive until the work is
>>>> done.
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: l3vpn-bounces@... [mailto:l3vpn-bounces@...] On
>>>> Behalf Of Marshall Eubanks
>>>>> Sent: zaterdag 21 januari 2012 14:38
>>>>> To: L3VPN; Stewart Bryant (stbryant); ben@...
>>>>> Subject: Possible Shutdown of L3VPN
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear WG members;
>>>>>
>>>>> With the Paris meeting coming up, we felt that you should know that
>>>>> there has been serious discussion of shutting down the L3VPN working
>>>>> group, both because of a decline of work in the group, and because of
>>>> the
>>>>> expected new work to come from the DC effort is likely to require a
>>>>> new working group with a different focus.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the WG were to be wound down, the basic choices for existing
>>>> drafts are
>>>>>
>>>>> - to go to last call with the drafts that are ready for it or
>>>>>
>>>>> - to put outstanding WG drafts into another WG, such as MPLS, or
>>>>>
>>>>> - to have the ADs sponsor "orphaned" drafts that don't fit in another
>>>>> WG as individual submissions.
>>>>>
>>>>> We have polled the current draft authors, and do not see any
>>>>> insurmountable difficulties with this process.
>>>>>
>>>>> There doesn't at present seem to be enough business to warrant
>>>> another
>>>>> L3VPN meeting in Paris. However, we feel that the future of the WG
>>>>> (and of the work)
>>>>> should be discussed in person, so we plan to request time on the
>>>>> agenda to discuss this at
>>>>> the RTGAREA meeting.
>>>>>
>>>>> If anyone feels that closing L3VPN would be a mistake, now is the
>>>> time
>>>>> to speak up.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Marshall Eubanks / Ben Niven-Jenkins
>>>
>>
>>
>