Tom Petch
- Original Message -
From: Dale R. Worley wor...@ariadne.com
To: t.p. daedu...@btconnect.com
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 8:37 PM
Subject: Re: Accessing tools from IETF pages
From: t.p. daedu...@btconnect.com
I wanted to submit an I-D so I wanted to
Similarly, AFAICS the 'IESG time' includes IETF last call and the
inevitable delay caused by the quantized nature of IESG teleconferenes.
On the average, this will be somewhere around 28-30 days (2 or 4 weeks
in Last call according to document type plus an average of 1 week until
the earliest
I wanted to send an update, after having discussed this topic in the IESG
retreat that we just had here in Dublin. The overall plan is to start with
three specific changes listed below. Note that these are approaches that we
have discussed, and more detailed plans will be developed in the
I am guessing that the authors intended the addition of the text
emphasizing that the no-zone typedefs are derived general typedef
addresses the difference in the patterns.
Is there a YANG rule that says tat if typedef X is derived from typedef
Y then the string for X must match the pattern
Thanks Bing -
The updates make the document better, and I appreciate the resolution of
referencing Tim's expired draft.
I think you've addressed all my comments except for the one on section
5.1, but that's ok.
For completeness and ease on the ADs, here's an updated summary:
Document:
At 16:06 16-04-2013, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'The Internet Numbers Registry System'
draft-housley-rfc2050bis-01.txt as Informational RFC
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and
On 11/05/2013 04:58, Stig Venaas wrote:
On 5/10/2013 8:12 AM, Robert Sparks wrote:
Thanks Bing -
The updates make the document better, and I appreciate the resolution of
referencing Tim's expired draft.
So the solution is to not reference it? I see the name of the draft is
mentioned in
On May 10, 2013 11:51 AM, SM s...@resistor.net wrote:
At 16:06 16-04-2013, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'The Internet Numbers Registry System'
draft-housley-rfc2050bis-01.txt as Informational RFC
The
SM,
On May 10, 2013, at 11:40 AM, SM s...@resistor.net wrote:
In Section 2:
As such, allocations must be made in accordance with the operational
needs of those running the networks that make use of these number
resources and by taking into consideration pool limitations at the
time
The IAB announced a call for nominations and volunteers for serving on the RSOC
on 24 April 2013. For details on the position and further links, please see
the original message below.
The call completed, and 12 people accepted nominations. As specified in the
announcement, the IAB is now
The IESG has received a request from the Softwires WG (softwire) to
consider the following document:
- 'Public IPv4 over IPv6 Access Network'
draft-ietf-softwire-public-4over6-09.txt as Informational RFC
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 6942
Title: Diameter Support for the EAP
Re-authentication Protocol (ERP)
Author: J. Bournelle, L. Morand,
S. Decugis, Q. Wu,
12 matches
Mail list logo
