Dear Xiao,

Thanks for the revised I-D.

About the id-nit warning, it is because the I-D contains text from RFC 5880 (in 
the OLD TEXT sections) and RFC 5880 is using the old copyright/trust sentences, 
i.e., normally this I-D authors should request permission from the current 
copyright holders of RFC 5880.

For more details look at https://trustee.ietf.org/about/faq/ for the text about 
6.c.iii legend.

In this *specific* case, the copyright for RFC 5880 is the authors’ employer 
(Juniper being a US company) and there is one Juniper author on this draft, Raj 
Chetan Boddireddy. So all is good and you can safely ignore this warning.

Regards

-éric



From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Date: Thursday, 5 December 2024 at 01:05
To: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Let's not forget about draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo

Dear Eric,



Thank you for the reminder.

As you requested, I've posted version -13 to address all the non-blocking IESG 
comments. Link as below.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-13

Except for the Discuss point from Zahed, I have one more thing that needs your 
help. As Gunter has also indicated, there is a warning as below while 
validating this draft.

  Miscellaneous warnings:

  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------



     (Using the creation date from RFC5880, updated by this document, for

     RFC5378 checks: 2004-07-13)



  -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may

     have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008.  If you

     have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant

     the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore

     this comment.  If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer.

     (See the Legal Provisions document at

     https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.)

Then how can we resolve this warning appropriately?



Cheers,

Xiao Min
Original
From: EricVyncke(evyncke) <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>;
Date: 2024年12月04日 17:10
Subject: Let's not forget about draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo
Dear authors, WG,

It is more than a month since the IESG evaluation, and this draft is not yet 
approved.

AFAIK, Zahed (the discuss owner) and Xiao Min are in discussion to resolve the 
blocking “UDP congestion” issue.

There were also other IESG comments (e.g., Gunter’s one with good text 
suggestions, but also reviews by Mahesh, John, Murray, ...), i.e., let’s submit 
a -13 with at least addressing the non-blocking IESG comments.

Regards

-éric


Reply via email to