Hi Mirja, Thanks a lot for your comments. Please see inline below.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 3:41 PM Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker < [email protected]> wrote: > Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-14: Abstain > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > While I think the content of this document is fine and I'm sure it was > valuable > to has this written down as basis for potentially on-going working group > discussion, I don't see a value in publishing this document in a > (separate) RFC. > > Further I don't see a milestone covering this document in the dmm charter.. > There is a bullet point on "Distributed mobility management deployment > models > and scenarios" however that does not mean that this has to be documented in > potentially multiple RFCs. There is also draft-ietf-dmm-deployment-models > with > a quite central reference in the document, however, this draft is expired > for > more than a year. What's the plan here? > [Carlos] I've checked with the chairs and this draft-ietf-dmm-deployment-models is not going to be updated. Therefore, I'll review and update our draft to remove this reference, adding whatever is needed to ensure the document is self-cointained. Thanks, Carlos
_______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
