Hi Giles,
2014-02-10, Giles Heron:
The draft has a major limitation (no support for interconnecting
routers, but only for interconnecting hosts) [...]
That would indeed be an issue if the document was aiming standard track
to address a specific use case including router interconnections, or if
the limitation was not documented. But, the document is not aiming
standard track, and has a section to document limitations to which the
working group may contribute text for this particular limitation.
sorry - just spotted the poll has already closed.
The date had been mistakenly set 10 days too early.
The poll is not closed yet.
-Thomas
On 4 Feb 2014, at 13:35, Thomas Morin <[email protected]>
wrote:
Hello working group,
This email starts a two-week poll on adopting
draft-xu-l3vpn-virtual-subnet [1] as a working group item.
Please send comments to the list and state if you support adoption
or not (in the later case, please also state the reasons).
This poll runs until February 9th.
*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR
that applies to this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed
in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and
5378 for more details).
==> *If you are listed as a document author or contributor* please
respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of
any relevant IPR.
The draft will not be adopted until a response has been received
from each author and contributor.
If you are on the L3VPN WG mailing list but are not listed as an
author or contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you
are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance
with IETF rules.
Thank you,
Martin & Thomas l3vpn chairs
[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-l3vpn-virtual-subnet
