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

I'm seeing a lot of disussion on the problem statement,
but this is about the architecture document. Putting aside
failures to understand the basic principles of wireless
communications, what's the confusion on the architecture
document?

(Please note that's a question, not a statement either way.)

-----Original Message-----
From: Stan Ratliff (sratliff) [mailto:sratliff@cisco.com] 
Sent: 21 November 2007 14:47
To: Alexandru Petrescu; Shubhranshu
Cc: autoconf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Autoconf] Request to publish
draft-ietf-autoconf-manetarch-07.txt

               *** WARNING ***

This mail has originated outside your organization,
either from an external partner or the Global Internet. 
     Keep this in mind if you answer this message. 

I agree with Alex -- there is a sufficient amount of confusion
or difference of opinion that I think it's premature to push the
draft at this time. 

Regards,
Stan 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Alexandru Petrescu [mailto:alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com] 
>Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 8:39 AM
>To: Shubhranshu
>Cc: autoconf@ietf.org
>Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Request to publish 
>draft-ietf-autoconf-manetarch-07.txt
>
>
>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??
>
>Alex
>PS: I removed IESG from Cc to not create further problems.  But you
>     understand what I mean.
>
>
>______________________________________________________________________
>This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
>For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
>______________________________________________________________________
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Autoconf mailing list
>Autoconf@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
>

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

********************************************************************
This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
distribute its contents to any other person.
********************************************************************

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