Hi Kai, Support adoption!
Should the IANA consideration section follow the format followed by RFC 7285 which includes lot more details on the rationale, requested information, string format etc. That also made me wonder if there is some benefit to also mark priv: for private use as done for some of the other ALTO registries. Thanks! Dhruv On Mon, Mar 7, 2022 at 4:58 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear all, > > I have been appointed to run the Call for Adoption of > draft-bw-alto-cost-mode-01. > > Following up with what has been proposed and agreed during the IESG review > on draft-ietf-alto-path-vector [1], we are starting a call for adoption of > the ALTO cost mode [2] document as a charter deliverable. It both helps > push forward existing WG document and fits in the protocol maintenance item > in the current charter. > > The Call for Adoption will close on March 21 (2 weeks after the IETF > submission deadline). Please post to the mailing list if you support or > appose the adoption, or have any comments or suggestions. > > [1] > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/WWoyJyM0PioBWM_rADYT-Z_I8t4/ > [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bw-alto-cost-mode-01 > > Thanks! > > Best, > Kai > _______________________________________________ > alto mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto >
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
