In favor.

Dino

> On Jan 11, 2024, at 7:52 AM, Luigi Iannone <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> Happy new year! 
> 
> As you may have seen from Alberto’s shepherd review of the name encoding 
> document, it is suggested to move the document to standard track.
> 
> Jim Guichard (our AD) is OK as long as the WG is OK with this change and that 
> deployment experience is added to the document.
> 
> Hence, this email opens a two weeks call to check if you agree with the 
> change.
> 
> Please reply to this email stating whether you are in favor or you are 
> against.
> (Silence does not count)
> 
> Please reply.
> 
> Ciao
> 
> L.
>  
> 
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>> From: "Alberto Rodriguez-Natal \(natal\)" <[email protected]>
>> Subject: [lisp] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding
>> Date: December 28, 2023 at 12:00:33 GMT+1
>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>> 
>> Hi all,
>>  The shepherd’s review of the LISP Distinguished Name Encoding has been 
>> posted. The document is in good shape and minor identified nits have been 
>> fixed. Please find the review here:
>>  
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding/shepherdwriteup/
>>  However, as part of the review, it was raised the question if the document 
>> is in the right stream (currently in Experimental). Given that there are 
>> known implementations of the spec and that it has been running in production 
>> for some time, my suggestion is to consider moving this document to 
>> Standards track instead.
>>  Thanks,
>> Alberto
>> _______________________________________________
>> lisp mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lisp mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp

_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp

Reply via email to