Hi, In my opinion the proposed split is a good way to go forward.
Best regards, Teemu >-----Original Message----- >From: ext Brian Haberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: 18 December, 2006 16:37 >To: [email protected] >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Hinden Bob (Nokia-ES/MtView) >Subject: Progressing draft-ietf-ipv6-over-ppp-v2 > >IPv6 WG, > One of the issues raised during IESG review of >draft-ietf-ipv6-over-ppp-v2 was the lack of clarity in the >implementation reports on the support of compression, which is >required in order to move the specification to DS. Calls went >out within the PPP and compression communities for additional >reports detailing the interoperability of this portion of the >spec. Those calls were unanswered. > > Rather than re-cycle the entire spec at PS, Jari has >asked that the specification be split. The compression option >will move to a new draft targeted as a Proposed Standard. The >remaining components will be progressed to Draft Standard. >The current draft editor, Srihari Varada, has agreed to edit >both documents. > > Comments, questions, or concerns? > >Regards, >Brian > > >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >[email protected] >Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >-------------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
