Jeff and Chris, I did not see a response to the review comments at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtgwg/current/msg04924.html <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtgwg/current/msg04924.html>.
Although not mentioned explicitly, the timing was such that these ought to be part of the WG adoption request. Any consideration to that review and comments? Expectation of a response? Thanks! — Carlos. > On Jun 28, 2015, at 8:10 PM, Jeff Tantsura <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi > > This poll has ended and there has been sufficient support to adopt the > draft as the > working group document. > > Authors, please republish as draft-ietf-rtgwg-dt-encap-00 > > Thanks! > Jeff and Chris > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jeff Tantsura <[email protected]> > Date: Friday, May 22, 2015 at 2:58 PM > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Request for WG adoption of draft-rtg-dt-encap-02 > >> Hi RTGWG, >> >> The authors have requested the RTGWG to adopt draft-rtg-dt-encap-02 as >> working group document. >> >> >> Please indicate support or no-support by June 8, 2015. >> >> If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to >> this email stating of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. >> The response needs to be sent to the RTGWG mailing list. The document will >> not advance to the next stage until a response has been received from each >> author and each individual that has contributed to the document. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> Jeff & Chris >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > rtgwg mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
