Hi,
On 02/17/2016 11:36 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
Hi,
I have reviewed the previous versions of this document. I do not find
significant changes in the content since. I believe that it’s ready
for publication.
The comments in
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/opsawg/current/msg04161.html have not yet
been addressed.
Having written those comment, I obviously feel that there should be some
changes made before publication.
Regards
Andreas
AFAIK the document was also reviewed by IEEE 802.11. I am copying the Dorothy
Stanley who is the liaison manager, as I do not know if she is
subscribed to the WG mail list.
Regards,
Dan
*From:*OPSAWG [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Warren Kumari
*Sent:* Wednesday, February 17, 2016 12:31 AM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* [OPSAWG] Review of "Alternate Tunnel Encapsulation for Data Frames in
CAPWAP" - draft-ietf-opsawg-capwap-alt-tunnel
Dear OpsAWG,
While we have lots of energy / interest, we'd appreciate some additional review
of draft-ietf-opsawg-capwap-alt-tunnel
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-capwap-alt-tunnel/
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_draft-2Dietf-2Dopsawg-2Dcapwap-2Dalt-2Dtunnel_&d=BQMFaQ&c=BFpWQw8bsuKpl1SgiZH64Q&r=I4dzGxR31OcNXCJfQzvlsiLQfucBXRucPvdrphpBsFA&m=YSTTTzZjDjD_fxRDbZTWgW6tBrwOadoMW7MP4RRFFdQ&s=ZuwP2TZyReJXmH8tHtt8Bg0SDGvmX2_un8TtmJU5sQI&e=>
).
This document has an interesting history - it completed WGLC in 2014-08-27 and
was submitted to be published as an RFC on 2014-09-08.
We then got draft-you-opsawg-capwap-separation-for-mp, which had some some
significant similarities. We asked the ADs to hold alt-tunnel
while we discussed what to do, and then finally asked the ADs / IESG to return
it to the WG so that these two documents could be merged into
one ( https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/opsawg/current/msg04071.html
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mail-2Darchive_web_opsawg_current_msg04071.html&d=BQMFaQ&c=BFpWQw8bsuKpl1SgiZH64Q&r=I4dzGxR31OcNXCJfQzvlsiLQfucBXRucPvdrphpBsFA&m=YSTTTzZjDjD_fxRDbZTWgW6tBrwOadoMW7MP4RRFFdQ&s=59ocMkJDZW_0tPUy9QccyjIc81Yjqe5RhjgrCX0aG8M&e=>
).
This document has already passed one WGLC (module the minor merging), and we
are waiting on the authors to address some comments (e.g:
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/opsawg/current/msg04161.html
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mail-2Darchive_web_opsawg_current_msg04161.html&d=BQMFaQ&c=BFpWQw8bsuKpl1SgiZH64Q&r=I4dzGxR31OcNXCJfQzvlsiLQfucBXRucPvdrphpBsFA&m=YSTTTzZjDjD_fxRDbZTWgW6tBrwOadoMW7MP4RRFFdQ&s=Y24UHv4v54xg7rgWKHivf8xbeORWBYd3sjg6SJg1t2w&e=>
)
and update the email addresses - once that happens we will do another WGLC --
but, while we are waiting, we'd appreciate any other review
and feedback.
W
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
