Hi Joel, Could you please confirm which sub-sections of the draft do your comment apply-to? Thank you.
Cheers, Pablo. -----Original Message----- From: dmm <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Joel M. Halpern Sent: viernes, 1 de abril de 2022 17:28 To: Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Re: [DMM] Second WGLC on draft-ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane As far as I can tell, this document still attempts to redefine 3GPP standards in an IETF standards track document. That is in my view unacceptable. Yes, those sections are labelled "informational". But they are still the same content, presented the same way. Pretending they are informational in a standards track document is simply not sufficient. If they are really informational, pull them out to a separate informational document. And we can then debate the value of publishing those non-standard approaches. (Personally, I do not see the value.) Yours, Joel On 4/1/2022 11:13 AM, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) wrote: > Folks: > > We have issued a WGLC on draft-ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane in April of > last year. Based on the feedback and the comments from the WG, we > chose to hold the document so the authors can resolve the identified > issues from that LC. The authors have worked with the reviewers and > have revised the document. They believe that there are no open issues. > We are issuing a second last call. This message commences a one-week > WGLC for all feedback. Please provide any additional feedback you may have. > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplan > e-19 > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile-upla > ne-19> > > Sri > > Chair DMM WG > > *From: *Sri Gundavelli <[email protected]> > *Date: *Wednesday, April 7, 2021 at 10:35 AM > *To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> > *Subject: *WGLC on draft-ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane-11 > > Working Group: > > As we discussed in the last IETF meeting, we are issuingWGLCon > draft-ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane-11. > > The document went through several revisions and there were good amount > of reviews on this document. I am very pleased with the quality of > this document. The authors have addressed all the comments and there > are no open issues that we are tracking at this time. We believe the > document is ready for IESG reviews and like to confirm the same from > the working group. > > The following message commences a two weekWGLCfor all feedback. > > Document Link: > > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane-11.t > xt > <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane-11. > txt> > > Please post any comments/concerns on this document. > > Thanks! > > Sri > > > _______________________________________________ > dmm mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
