>>>>> On Sun, 15 May 2005 11:17:49 -0400,
>>>>> Margaret Wasserman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> I've asked related questions about this comment on the wg list two
>> times, including requested information at the Minneapolis meeting, but
>> I've not got any responses...if this comment does not require any
>> change to the document itself, I believe we are done. If it does, or
>> if it requires any particular action (e.g., collecting implementation
>> report), please clarify that.
> It sounds like he document is ready, which is great, thanks!
> It is up to the WG Chairs, Bob and Brian, to put together an
> implementation report. In this particular case, this may only
> involve pointing at the old implementation report and explaining why
> the changes in this document do not warrant gathering further
> implementation data. I will work with Bob and Brian on this.
Cool, thanks.
>> As I answered at this list, 2461bis and 2462bis should be updated at
>> the same timing, so we'll eventually need to wait for 2461bis to be
>> approved. If we reach the point, please just keep 2462bis sleeping
>> for now.
> Brian and Bob, what is the status on 2461bis? Are we expecting it to
> be submitted for publication soon?
2461bis has passed the first wg last call. And, in my understanding,
there were several non-trivial comments and we expect a new version
addressing the comments before submitting the document to the IESG.
As far as I can see, the comments were not so controversial, so I
expect the next version will leave the wg.
JINMEI, Tatuya
Communication Platform Lab.
Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
