IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Anima] Result of WGLC on draft-ietf-anima-stable-connectivity-03 - Respond by July 28, 2017

Sheng Jiang <jiangsheng@huawei.com> Tue, 01 August 2017 07:24 UTC

Return-Path: <jiangsheng@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0F0A1329D5; Tue, 1 Aug 2017 00:24:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.221
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.221 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2bRx_ia1-kjl; Tue, 1 Aug 2017 00:24:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 346821329D0; Tue, 1 Aug 2017 00:24:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO LHREML713-CAH.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DLR40871; Tue, 01 Aug 2017 07:23:59 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from NKGEML411-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.70) by LHREML713-CAH.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Tue, 1 Aug 2017 08:23:58 +0100
Received: from NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com ([fe80::a54a:89d2:c471:ff]) by nkgeml411-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.70]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Tue, 1 Aug 2017 15:23:53 +0800
From: Sheng Jiang <jiangsheng@huawei.com>
To: "anima@ietf.org" <anima@ietf.org>
CC: "anima-chairs@ietf.org" <anima-chairs@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Result of WGLC on draft-ietf-anima-stable-connectivity-03 - Respond by July 28, 2017
Thread-Index: AdMKleelDDiuTNvHRt24j9Uwizs6zg==
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2017 07:23:52 +0000
Message-ID: <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B927CE3D7BA@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.45.124.96]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B927CE3D7BANKGEML515MBXchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020203.59802C90.00C4, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 950a78b148f5c41b14758da38314ccfd
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/j6bWmNihlscL_PKZnN6oePZcEO0>
Subject: [Anima] Result of WGLC on draft-ietf-anima-stable-connectivity-03 - Respond by July 28, 2017
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2017 07:24:06 -0000

Hi, all

We received no negative response to the WGLC on draft-ietf-anima-stable-connectivity-03 during the two-week WGLC and we did receive good reviews through the WG document stage, through the shepherd review process and WGLC period. Considering the past history of this work, I, with my ANIMA chair cap on, feel it is has passed the WGLC and should advance. This conclusion is made with the condition that the authors would solve the comments received during the WGLC and these modifications were not substantial changes from 03 version. If there are big changes, a shorter second WGLC may be needed.

Up to now, there is no IPR disclosure linked to this document.

Once the update is published and it meets the above condition, for which the second WGLC is not needed, as the document shepherd, I will finalize the shepherd document and send the document on.

Best regards,

Sheng (co-chair, Toerless who as a co-author stayed neutral on the content side)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email