Thanks Warren. I've just replied to Qin's comments. The original e-mail went to the wrong place due to some misconfigured filters :(
Version -15 (to be submitted soon) should address all the comments received. Thanks, Carlos On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 1:37 AM Warren Kumari <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 4:20 PM CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Warren, > > > > Thanks for your comments. I've checked my e-mail twice and I haven't > been able to see the review from Qin Wu. Can you please forward it to me. > According to my records I've replied to all the comments and reviews to > this draft (I'm working on another one that is also at the IESG evaluation > now -- draft-ietf-dmm-pmipv6-dlif -- but this a different document). > > > > All directorate reviews should be linked from the Datatracker page: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring/ > The direct link to Qin's is: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/review-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-13-opsdir-lc-wu-2019-10-02/ > > > > Apologies in advance if I've missed the review from Qin Wu. > > > > Ah, fair enough, it is easy to miss emails, sometimes they go into spam, > etc. > > W > > > > Thanks, > > > > Carlos > > > > On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 7:57 PM Warren Kumari via Datatracker < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for > >> draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-14: No Objection > >> > >> 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: > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> I am balloting NoObj, but I had a hard time deciding between this and > DISCUSS > >> (I went with NoObj because I'm submitting this late) - Qin Wu submitted > an > >> OpsDir review with a number of open questions, as well as some very > easy to > >> address comments / suggestions. It looks like this were either ignored, > or > >> missed (or, perhaps I missed the discussion) > >> > >> I strongly encourage the authors and AD to review and address these > comments. > >> > >> > >> > > > -- > I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad > idea in the first place. > This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing > regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair > of pants. > ---maf >
_______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
