Re: [Autoconf] Request to publish draft-ietf-autoconf-manetarch-07.txt

Shubhranshu <shubranshu@gmail.com> Thu, 22 November 2007 06:04 UTC

Return-path: <autoconf-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iv5BF-0003PC-If; Thu, 22 Nov 2007 01:04:53 -0500
Received: from autoconf by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Iv5BE-0003Oz-77 for autoconf-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2007 01:04:52 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iv5BD-0003Or-Rq for autoconf@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2007 01:04:51 -0500
Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.246]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iv5BB-0001oF-Fe for autoconf@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2007 01:04:51 -0500
Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id d11so633590and for <autoconf@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 22:04:49 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; bh=w3EtdF4zV2WzRa0H2mchwfa9htywWTfpZ7NjrRPihGo=; b=rKc9luP3KQwVP+RoqidZKb3R4SELmdfydL/oeeHhy38rU21/qyLvtQ+jy6iYPW9P0ppPTdmtc0syENPAbkwWKO6vcXfXt7WtxxOpPz9wTaXc6PiLAtw/HaJX9t1ULOwyJqr6MDFAyOx5qrASWgDXCVv8FWeZkyAdZ0Yoe3ipQbE=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=IlSPLVOFC801Y/Kl0skkXnufUbfLNUphWrIhqFm5VXqxKwX4WaCGPcxRoI4yitvcHjNtQaataliHhsqlTu7NdDAWfHL2VB1SsPTHSrSyzecsZc5pkjCfDJ0WJWibnQdfJdvO7FdSfVOHnZZ0T/a4zQ7IH5ahVFZhpqqHClmIgfg=
Received: by 10.100.208.11 with SMTP id f11mr11363832ang.1195711489212; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 22:04:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.100.229.8 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 22:04:49 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <e9c684940711212204jfc0ff57s594f96b897a854c1@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2007 11:34:49 +0530
From: Shubhranshu <shubranshu@gmail.com>
To: alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Request to publish draft-ietf-autoconf-manetarch-07.txt
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 4d87d2aa806f79fed918a62e834505ca
Cc: autoconf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list <autoconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf>, <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/autoconf>
List-Post: <mailto:autoconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf>, <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org

Alex,

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alexandru Petrescu" <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
To: "Shubhranshu" <shubranshu@gmail.com>
>
> Shubhranshu wrote:
> [...]
>>    4. Do you have any specific concerns/issues with this document that
>> you believe
>> the ADs and/or IESG should be aware of? For example, perhaps you are
>> uncomfortable with certain parts of the document, or have concerns
>> whether there really is a need for it. In any event, if your issues
>> have been discussed in the WG and the WG has indicated it that it
>> still wishes to advance the document, detail those concerns in the
>> write-up.
>>
>> NO.
>
> No?
>
> I've just raised yesterday an issue about multicast interpretation
> confusion between manetarch and problem statement documents.  HAs that
> been solved already?  A decision made?  The issue is here, and the
> following thread keeps the subject:
> http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/autoconf/current/msg00771.html
>
> Was there a decision made with respect to this issue?  It seems like the
> confusing issue around multicast that I've raised is completely ignored??
>

If the community thinks there are issues that really needs to be
addressed before moving this document forward then I'd be willing to
ask for postponement.

Why do you think there is a WGLC in the process ? I remember you
saying at the WG mailing list, about a couple of weeks after WGLC for
this ID ended, that you have some comments on section 5.1 but
"Otherwise - yes, I'm fine with the document." !! According to the ID
authors those comments were minor in nature and is addressed in the
later version. I am not sure if you or anyone would not have any
confusion or new thoughts even after, say, one year of further
discussions.


> Alex
> PS: I removed IESG from Cc to not create further problems.  But you
>     understand what I mean.

Irrespective of you keep them in CC or not, they are aware of the status.

- Shubhranshu


_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf