Subject: [midcom] *Non-binding* straw poll: two questions

From: Melinda Shore <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 12:18:03 -0500

I'd like to get a sense of the working group on two
questions.  The results of this straw poll are not binding -
THIS IS NOT A WORKING GROUP DECISION POLL.  If you haven't
read the evaluation document please don't respond.

1) Please identify any of the three remaining protocols that
you feel are unsuitable for use as a midcom protocol (you
may name more than one).

2) Please identify which of the three protocols you think
best fits the midcom framework and requirements documents,
as described in the evaluation draft.

Melinda
_______________________________________________
midcom mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/midcom

---

From: "Joel M. Halpern" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:08:31 -0500

Reviewing the draft, understanding that this is not binding [and a bunch of 
other caveats to be fair...]

1) I believe all four remaining protocols can meet the MIDCOM 
requirements.  However, I feel that the issue of who establishes the 
connection, while it can be dealt with, is an important facet of MIDCOM 
operation.  Therefore, I would say that MegaCo and COPS are less 
suitable.  (If pushed, I would say unsuitable, which is what the question 
actually asks.)

2) Based on the information in the evaluation document (plus gut feel) I 
think that we will be slightly better off using Diameter for the basis of 
the MIDCOM operation.  But it is a very close call.

Yours,
Joel