Subject: [PCN] Fwd: New Liaison Statement, "LS on draft Recommendation Q.PCNApp"

From: Lars Eggert <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 10:42:52 +0300

Hi, PCN WG,

The ITU-T has sent you the following liaison statement on PCN (but  
only sent it to my email address, which is why I'm forwarding it.)

Please review the documents attached to the LS and discuss if you want  
to send a response. I've taken a quick look, and it seems that the ITU- 
T is making some assumptions about how some of the components of the  
PCN architecture work on a technical level that the WG hasn't come to  
consensus on.

Lars

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "ext Arshey Odedra(ITU-T SG 11)" <[email-masked]>
> Date: June 13, 2008 19:44:31 GMT+03:00
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: New Liaison Statement, "LS on draft Recommendation Q.PCNApp"
> Reply-To: [email-masked]
>
>
> Title: LS on draft Recommendation Q.PCNApp
> Submission Date: 2008-06-13
> URL of the IETF Web page: https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/liaison_detail.cgi?detail_id=461
> Please reply by 2008-09-01
>
> From: Arshey Odedra(ITU-T SG 11) <[email-masked]>
> To: IETF Transport Area Directors, PCN Working Group Chairs([email-masked] 
> )
> Cc:
> Reponse Contact:
> Technical Contact:
> Purpose: For comment
> Body: Liaison Statement from ITU-T SG1 Q5/11 Rapporteur Meeting (May  
> 2008).
> Attachment(s):
>     LS on Drfat Recommendation  Q.PCNApp (https://datatracker.ietf.org/documents/LIAISON/file567.doc 
> )
>     Draft Recommendation Q.PCNApp, Enhancement of resource and  
> admission control protocols to use pre-congestion notification  
> (PCN), out of the May 2008 meeting (https://datatracker.ietf.org/documents/LIAISON/file568.doc 
> )
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
PCN mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn