hi Remi, 2012/7/10 Rémi Després <[email protected]>
> Hi, Suresh, > > This draft contains valuable advices which can apply to 4rd as well as to > MAP-T+E, but is exclusively MAP oriented. > surely it is a MAP-oriented stuff as only the MAP-T+E are considered right now as the deployment paradigm in the draft. therefore i don't think it should wait 4rd being chosen for standardization. on the other hand, were 4rd rather than MAP chosen for standardization in the future, this deployment draft might be deprecated or its contents might be re-used and revised for 4rd deployment. no matter what the result would be, i don't see any problem of dealing that in the framework of a WG document. hope you may consider over this again. thanks! - maoke > As such, I find it premature to move it to WG-draft status. > > If 4rd is chosen for standardization, adapting this deployment draft to it > looks easy. > I therefore suggest to keep it as is for the time being (while pursuing > discussion on its contents). > > Regards, > RD > > > Le 2012-07-06 à 23:18, Suresh Krishnan a écrit : > > > Hi all, > > This call is being initiated to determine whether there is WG > > consensus towards adoption of draft-mdt-softwire-map-deployment-02 as a > > softwire WG draft. Please state whether or not you're in favor of the > > adoption by replying to this email. If you are not in favor, please also > > state your objections in your response. The call will complete at > > midnight PDT on 2012-07-20. > > > > Regards > > Suresh & Yong > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Softwires mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires >
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
