RE: [RPRWG] OK, we heard them talk, but what did they SAY?
Spencer,
Since we had setup a ad-hoc working group for discussing these exact things
(the bridging working group), we should try to discuss this within that
context. My recollection of the 802.1d response was that other technologies
do exist above layer 2 that would provide the customer id and customer
separation. I don't know what the next steps are for this ad-hoc working
group.
Thanks
Vinay
-----Original Message-----
From: Dawkins, Spencer [mailto:Spencer.DAWKINS@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 8:08 AM
To: 802.17
Subject: [RPRWG] OK, we heard them talk, but what did they SAY?
When we met with representatives of 802.1 in Austin, I thought they said we
should rely on IETF technology for both ring interconnection (beyond 802.1D
conformance) and customer separation (beyond 802.1Q conformance).
Does anyone think they said something else?
Does anyone WISH they said something else?
I'm certainly interested in defining technologies for these requirements in
a carrier environment (faster spanning tree reconvergence, customer
separation that doesn't interfere with customer VLANs) within 802. Any
others?
Spencer Dawkins
-----Original Message-----
From: RDLove [mailto:rdlove@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 9:52 AM
To: 802.17; Italo.Busi@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [RPRWG] Re: Question on IEEE-SA membership requirements
Italo and Vittorio, you have asked a good question to be answered on the
IEEE 802.17 reflector. Therefore, I am taking the liberty of forwarding
both your question and my response to it.
Voting Rights for IEEE 802.17, and to LMSC Sponsor balloting
There are two levels of voting rights of interest to us as IEEE 802.17
participants.
1) The right to vote within an IEEE 802 Working group, in our case
within IEEE 802.17.
Everyone who has satisfied meeting attendance requirements, paid their
meeting fees, and hasn't lost voting rights for other reasons, such as
failing to respond to two of the last three ballots, is eligible and
encouraged to vote on all IEEE 802.17 ballots. A list of voting members is
maintained and is posted on the Members Only section of the 802.17 web site.
2) Once a draft passes the IEEE 802.17 ballot process and goes out to
sponsor level ballot, a ballot pool is formed from IEEE SA members who may
or may not have participated in IEEE 802.17. To participate in the LMSC
Sponsor ballot of a draft you must be an IEEE SA member. Being a balloter
in the sponsor ballot gives IEEE 802.17 members a second chance to get
comments in against the draft. Normally the working group chair and editors
try to participate in this ballot to be able to submit comments based on any
late discoveries of problems with the wording of the draft. Primarily, the
sponsor level ballot is run to bring in comments from people that have not
had a chance to directly participate in the development of the standard.
Best regards,
Robert D. Love
Chair, Resilient Packet Ring Alliance
President, LAN Connect Consultants
7105 Leveret Circle Raleigh, NC 27615
Phone: 919 848-6773 Mobile: 919 810-7816
email: rdlove@xxxxxxxx Fax: 208 978-1187
----- Original Message -----
From: <Italo.Busi@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <rdlove@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <Italo.Busi@xxxxxxxxxx>; <Vittorio.Mascolo@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 10:23 AM
Subject: Question on IEEE-SA membership requirements
> Hi Bob,
>
> we have a procedural question.
>
> In order to get balloting voting rights, do we need to be members of
> the IEEE-SA or it is enough to be voters in the 802.17 WG?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Vittorio and Italo
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ----------------------
> \ / Busi Italo
> \ / OMSN System Group
> \ / ALCATEL - Optics TND R&D
> \ / Via Trento, 30
> \ / 20059 Vimercate (Mi)
> \ / ITALY
> \ /
> \ / E-mail: Italo.Busi@xxxxxxxxxx
> \ / Tel. +39 039 686.7054
> \ / Fax. +39 039 686.3590
> \/
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>