Re: [bfcpbis] Draft new version: rfc4583bis-27

[Ben Campbell <[e-mail]>]

Good point. Perhaps we should ask them which they prefer?

Ben.

> On Dec 20, 2018, at 10:43 AM, Adam Roach <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> My understanding is that the RPC sometimes does preliminary editing work while waiting for references to settle (and I know in particular they've been trying to work ahead on some of the C238 documents to lessen the impact when the final reference breaks free). In this case, it might be easier for them if we put it in as an RFC Editor note.
> 
> /a
> 
> On 12/20/18 10:29 AM, Ben Campbell wrote:
>> I suggest a new version, so we can get things in order before the editing process starts.
>> 
>> Adam, do you concur?
>> 
>> Ben.
>> 
>>> On Dec 20, 2018, at 1:48 AM, Suhas Nandakumar (snandaku) <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Sorry I wasn't aware that I had an action item here. Is the idea to move these attributes to TBD instead of NORMAL ? If so, should we do it as part of Rfc-Editor work or should I submit a new version of mux-attributes that does the changes .
>>> 
>>> Please advise
>>> 
>>> Thanks
>>> Suhas
>>> From: Christer Holmberg <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 11:35 PM
>>> To: Ben Campbell; Charles Eckel (eckelcu); Suhas Nandakumar (snandaku)
>>> Cc: Adam Roach; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; The IESG; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>> Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] Draft new version: rfc4583bis-27
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> My understanding is that Suhas was going to update the mux-categories draft, to be aligned with 4583bis.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> Christer
>>> 
>>> From: Ben Campbell <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>> Date: Thursday, 20 December 2018 at 5.53
>>> To: Charles Eckel <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>> Cc: Christer Holmberg <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>> Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] Draft new version: rfc4583bis-27
>>> 
>>> I’ve probably lost track of the discussion somewhere; but it looks like 4583bis and mux-attributes still disagree on the mux-categories for confid, userid, and floorid. Was there a plan to change those in mux-attributes prior to publication?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Ben.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Dec 18, 2018, at 4:10 PM, Charles Eckel (eckelcu) <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Ben,
>>> 
>>> Please have a look at this updated version and let us know if it addresses your DISCUSS.
>>> Reviews by others and confirmation that this update addresses your comments would be appreciated as well.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Charles
>>> 
>>> From: bfcpbis <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> on behalf of Charles Eckel <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>> Date: Friday, December 14, 2018 at 8:00 AM
>>> To: Christer Holmberg <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, Adam Roach <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, Mary Barnes <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, The IESG <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>> Subject: Re: [bfcpbis] Draft new version: rfc4583bis-27
>>> 
>>> Thanks Christer. Here are the links to the corresponding draft. All the changes in it look good to me.
>>> 
>>> A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis-27.txt
>>> has been successfully submitted by Christer Holmberg and posted to the
>>> IETF repository.
>>> 
>>> URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis-27.txt <https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis-27.txt>
>>> Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis/>
>>> Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis-27 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis-27>
>>> Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis>
>>> Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis-27 <https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bfcpbis-rfc4583bis-27>
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Charles
>>> 
>>> From: Christer Holmberg <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>> Date: Saturday, December 8, 2018 at 7:42 AM
>>> To: Charles Eckel <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, Adam Roach <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, Mary Barnes <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, The IESG <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>> Subject: Draft new version: rfc4583bis-27
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Based on the gen-art review, and the IESG reviews, I have submitted a new version (-27) of draft-rfc4583bis.
>>> 
>>> The new version implements the following merged pull request:
>>> 
>>> https://github.com/cdh4u/draft-bfcp-4583bis/pull/13 <https://github.com/cdh4u/draft-bfcp-4583bis/pull/13>
>>> 
>>> Thank You to everyone who provided comments!
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> Christer
>>> 
>> 
>