[Autoconf] Request to publish draft-ietf-autoconf-manetarch-07.txt
Shubhranshu <shubranshu@gmail.com> Wed, 21 November 2007 11:49 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 1Iuo4v-00015l-0O; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 06:49:13 -0500
Received: from autoconf by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Iuo4t-00015f-AO for autoconf-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 06:49:11 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iuo4s-00015X-Rt for autoconf@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 06:49:10 -0500
Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.250]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iuo4p-00021S-0x for autoconf@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 06:49:10 -0500
Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id d11so571559and for <autoconf@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 03:49:06 -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=tc7lrGV80ilaI/BHgSY2kBkeBW1fXrty5J+6R57SgTk=; b=faw4qCcDqYn2wbbthkth7waqdftv+uSLpATrDSuVPFLl9Kfc488j1CObpN+jnvvNiN2ia7ZLsJiJ4a2MwfFRkL0rg3RxGcHb+LgSK054HDMY0xJlJeVJFGhY/xUVoFJiSTN9BQgFauDjjJJ1DQVDwaVd3qYQZx7pCF2XqGrflhc=
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=YlqFhU+0nwmRzmo/bG/a+ttnB1DcX8clwxjP5svnmhgLfWVtEzTHglN5bjwELnOkNV9S/MlLFJp+SB7QhtfJladxBmSZcxChDFDXYCIWYEI2p6Wdoy/QYzJU+MHEHRUQySo/TtQi1RdgHupTDJrGN2dJ3eniP7fYyUcWrWHBwyw=
Received: by 10.100.41.16 with SMTP id o16mr9552519ano.1195645746704; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 03:49:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.100.229.8 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 03:49:06 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <e9c684940711210349j76ca51bcvce351b09bda660d5@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 17:19:06 +0530
From: Shubhranshu <shubranshu@gmail.com>
To: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>, iesg-secretary@ietf.org, autoconf@ietf.org
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: a2c12dacc0736f14d6b540e805505a86
Cc: Thomas Clausen <thomas@thomasclausen.org>
Subject: [Autoconf] Request to publish draft-ietf-autoconf-manetarch-07.txt
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
This is a request to publish draft-ietf-autoconf-manetarch-07.txt . I am the shepherding WG chair for this document. Please find below the shepherd write-up for this document: Shepherd Write-Up: ================ 1. Have the chairs personally reviewed this version of the Internet Draft (ID), and in particular, do they believe this ID is ready to forward to the IESG for publication? YES. 2. Has the document had adequate review from both key WG members and key non-WG members? Do you have any concerns about the depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed? YES, the ID has been adequately reviewed from both key WG members and key non-WG members. NO, there is no concern about the reviews. 3. Do you have concerns that the document needs more review from a particular (broader) perspective (e.g., security, operational complexity, someone familiar with AAA, etc.)? NO. 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. 5. How solid is the WG consensus behind this document? Does it represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with others being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and agree with it? GOOD consensus exists behind this document. 6. Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme discontent? If so, please summarize the areas of conflict in separate email to the Responsible Area Director. NO. There were no objections raised during the extended WGLC 7. Have the chairs verified that the document adheres to all of the ID Checklist items ? YES. 8. Is the document split into normative and informative references? Are there normative references to IDs, where the IDs are not also ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state? (note here that the RFC editor will not publish an RFC with normative references to IDs, it will delay publication until all such IDs are also ready for publication as RFCs.) NO, the document has only informative references and does not split into normative and informative references. 9. What is the intended status of the document? (e.g., Proposed Standard, Informational?) Informational. 10. * Technical Summary The document discusses Mobile Ad hoc NETworks (MANETs). It presents the initial motivation for MANET and describes unaccustomed characteristics and challenges. It also defines a MANET, other MANET entities, and MANET architectural concepts. * Working Group Summary It was required to have the MANET architecture well understood and documented before focusing on the solution space. Lot of discussion focused on the addressing and prefix model for MANET, which was then integrated and is reflected in this version of the document. * Protocol Quality This document is the result of a very long discussion and interaction among the members of the Internet area in general and MANET group in particular. The document describes the MANET architecture which has evolved over the past several years based on the long MANET protocol design and implementation experiences. _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
- RE: [Autoconf] Request to publish draft-ietf-auto… Stan Ratliff (sratliff)
- [Autoconf] Request to publish draft-ietf-autoconf… Shubhranshu
- Re: [Autoconf] Request to publish draft-ietf-auto… Alexandru Petrescu
- RE: [Autoconf] Request to publish draft-ietf-auto… Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
- RE: [Autoconf] Request to publish draft-ietf-auto… Stan Ratliff (sratliff)
- RE: [Autoconf] Request to publish draft-ietf-auto… Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
- Re: [Autoconf] Request to publish draft-ietf-auto… Shubhranshu
- Re: [Autoconf] Request to publish draft-ietf-auto… Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [Autoconf] Request to publish draft-ietf-auto… Shubhranshu