On 2011-03-02 09:10, Alastair Johnson wrote:
On 3/1/2011 12:07 PM, Donald Neal wrote:
But we've seen this before. The most recent previous case I can think of is IETF TRILL vs. ITU 802.1aq. As with MPLS, it's not obvious that these are standards for the Internet as opposed to standards for something else.
That would be the IEEE for 802.1aq.
It's also not the first time competing standards have happened - including within IETF itself.
As far as I know, at least considering the last 15 years where I have personal knowledge, it is the first time that another standards organization, having completed a firm liaison agreement with the IETF about who does what, has blatantly reneged on that agreement. Topics like MPLS, TRILL and a lot of stuff about how IP runs over 3GPP/4G/LTE will always be on a boundary. It's a sad day when we can't rely on good faith agreements about this. However, on a more positive note: IMHO, operators getting together to agree on a common technical position is the strongest possible message to vendors. Ultimately it's what the vendors can sell that matters, not what the ITU says. Therefore, my suggestion is that operators should get their heads together (on a non-commercial basis, obviously) to come out with a joint statement about their preferred direction for MPLS OAM in future RFPs. Bria