IP over Optical WG (ipo) Meeting Minutes Thursday, November 21 at 0900-1130 ================================== CHAIRS: James Luciani Daniel Awduche AGENDA: 1) Working Group Status, Luciani, 5 mins Presentation of the status of the working group efforts 2) Carrier Optical Services Requirements, draft-ietf-ipo-carrier-requirements-04.txt, Ananth Nagarayan, 15min Summary: - describe the carrier service requirement from an itu-t/ason perspective - brief history of the document - fixing minor nits from version -03.txt - issues: not a lot of revision from the list thus expecting more input from the mailing list before moving forward 3) GMPLS Signaling applicability, draft-awduche-ipo-gmpls-signaling-applicability-00.txt, Awduche, 20 mins Summary: - describe applicability statement for gmpls signalling which is included in the ipo charter - two classes of applicability statements: 1) signalling and 2) routing - focus is on rsvp-te and its gmpls capabilities. Benefits include 1) rapid provisioning 2) interoperability between different optical sub-networks and between optical and IP domains 3) flexibility (re-confiugration/modification of the parameter of the connection), and 4) network survivability. - current draft is intented to become a wg document Discussion: - Dan Awduche: anybody see problems to progress this to a working group document ? - Dimitri Papadimitriou: could the next version give more detail about the label set capability usage for optical (meaning photonic) environements - Dan Awduche: the next version will cover more on label set capabilities and other label-related parameters that apply to the IPO context - Dan Awduche: who has read this document ? (show hands) - note: only few people have read this document - Bert Wijnen: not too many people here have read the draft, first 10 to 20 people (with respect to the meeting attendance) should have to read it first before progressing this i-d as a working group document - Dan Awduche: ask for feedback (through the IPO mailing list) in order to progres this draft. Lot's of good feedback have been received privatel though. - Bert Wijnen: the working group must look for positive statement and take them into account, we (as IETF) seek for participation of the working group (among other through the mailing list) and not for private comments - Dan Awduche: agrees with the statement of Bert - Bert Wijnen: I restate, people must read the document and have to post their feedback on the mailing list and this is the only way to progress Bert also mentions that seeing not a lot of people have read the document it is rather difficult to progress with it for the time being as a working group document - Jim Luciani: suggest reaction on the mailing list to make progress with this document - Dan Awduche: encourages people to write the document for the routing applicablity statements (since the corresponding ccamp wg effort is nearly completed)