On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 10:06 AM, t.petch <[email protected]> wrote: > I would like to see this published as an RFC.
thanks, I don't disagree. > The only discussion I see whether or not the title of 12.2 should have > an initial capital - I think that it should. that seems like something that can get cleaned up by the editor if it comes to it... would be nice if more folk would chime in, however, in either the positive or negative. > Tom Petch > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christopher Morrow" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 7:41 PM >> Folks, >> There's been work on the draft: >> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-grow-private-ip-sp-cores> >> >> I think the commenters' comments were addressed by the authors. >> Can we move this to WGLC now and clear that 6/19/2012 (June 19, 2012). >> >> Abstract of the draft: >> "The purpose of this document is to provide a discussion of the >> potential problems of using private, RFC1918, or non-globally- >> routable addressing within the core of an SP network. The > discussion >> focuses on link addresses and to a small extent loopback addresses. >> While many of the issues are well recognised within the ISP >> community, there appears to be no document that collectively >> describes the issues." >> >> Could there be some discussion on WGLC and we'll see about moving >> this along to the IESG? >> >> -chris >> _______________________________________________ >> GROW mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow >> > > _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
