So far I got one message from a co-author and its not encouraging: [email protected] (generated from [email protected]) SMTP error from remote mail server \ after RCPT TO:<[email protected]>: host mx5.tatacommunications.com [115.114.148.135]: 550 #5.1.0 Address rejected.
At best that counts as an address change at least temporarily to "unknown". This has been idle for very long. Lets give it a week or two and if no responses, then move use-cases and framework to abandoned state. If there is interest in the topic later, a new individual submission can be started (possibly just a framework) and the WG can decide if there is enough interest to make that new draft a WG item. Curtis In message <d10108c4.8db10%[email protected]> Jeff Tantsura writes: > > Hi Curtis, > > Please let me know how would you like to proceed with the draft. > If you feel it should progress and since Routing Directorate is done with > no issues found - please resubmit, I'll provide writeup and submit to the > IESG. > > Thanks! > > Cheers, > Jeff > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Curtis Villamizar <[email protected]> > Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 at 12:06 PM > To: Joel Halpern <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "<[email protected]>" > <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" > <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: RtgDir review: draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-use-cases-06.txt > > >In message <[email protected]> > >"Joel M. Halpern" writes: > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this > >>draft. > >> The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related > >> drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and > >> sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide > >> assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing > >> Directorate, please see > >> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir > >> > >> Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, > >>it > >> would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF > >> Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through > >> discussion or by updating the draft. > >> > >> Document: draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-use-cases-06.txt > >> Advanced Multipath Use Cases and Design Considerations > >> Reviewer: Joel M. Halpern > >> Review Date: 23-January-2015 > >> IETF LC End Date: N/A > >> Intended Status: Informational > >> > >> Summary: No issues found. This document is ready for publication. > >> > >> Minor note: This draft appears to have expired. > > > > > >Hello again Joel, > > > >FYI - to the Cc. I emailed Joel off list about this. This draft lay > >dormant in "AD review" for a long time. Apparently the AD shepard had > >a change of heart about this .. or something. > > > >The draft itself could be described as inconsequential but contains > >parts of earlier CL requirements draft and CL framework that more > >closely resembled use cases. This draft exists both to be > >informational and to unclutter the requirements and framework. > > > >At this point I can submit another draft. But ... > > > >I would like to know from the co-authors two things: > > > > 1. Is there still interest in CL aka Advanced Multipath? > > 2. Any changes in contact information? > > > >I'm particularly interested in whether there is interest at Verizon > >since they were the potential user driving this in the first place. > >However two of the three Verizon co-authors to the CL drafts are no > >longer at Verizon. > > > >No further replies should be interpreted as "no interest" although an > >explicit "no interest" would be preferred if that is the case. > > > >If there is interest I'll resubmit this. If there is still interest > >in the framework, we can resurrect that document as well but the > >framework needs work and discussion had fallen off to nothing by the > >time it expired. > > > >Curtis > > > >_______________________________________________ > >rtgwg mailing list > >[email protected] > >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
