[CCAMP] 答复: Input on publication track of WSON solutions documents

Lidan <huawei.danli@huawei.com> Mon, 08 October 2012 00:28 UTC

Return-Path: <huawei.danli@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0798521F858F for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Oct 2012 17:28:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.788
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.788 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, CN_BODY_35=0.339, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_ENC_GB2312=1.345]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OG4nvFdxDGEd for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Oct 2012 17:28:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00F0A21F8584 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Sun, 7 Oct 2012 17:28:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AKJ60689; Mon, 08 Oct 2012 00:28:25 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML404-HUB.china.huawei.com ( by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Mon, 8 Oct 2012 01:28:14 +0100
Received: from SZXEML401-HUB.china.huawei.com ( by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Mon, 8 Oct 2012 08:28:23 +0800
Received: from SZXEML538-MBX.china.huawei.com ([]) by szxeml401-hub.china.huawei.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Mon, 8 Oct 2012 08:28:18 +0800
From: Lidan <huawei.danli@huawei.com>
To: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>, CCAMP <ccamp@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [CCAMP] Input on publication track of WSON solutions documents
Thread-Index: AQHNoKqW9VaATtIFRUuyPShXGEJnQpeulg5g
Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2012 00:28:16 +0000
Message-ID: <92A1F6CF27D54D4DA5364E59D892A02A2E8FE7EC@szxeml538-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <506AFA9B.2000508@labn.net>
In-Reply-To: <506AFA9B.2000508@labn.net>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Subject: [CCAMP] 答复: Input on publication track of WSON solutions documents
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2012 00:28:27 -0000

I support option (a).


发件人: ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Lou Berger
发送时间: 2012年10月2日 22:31
收件人: CCAMP
主题: [CCAMP] Input on publication track of WSON solutions documents


The WG has several WSON-related drafts including:
   1. draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode
   2. draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te
   3. draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode
   4. draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signal-compatibility-ospf 	
   5. draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signaling

These drafts are currently identified as being on the Standards
Track.  The WG typically requests Standards Track publication of
documents that fill/fix a clear protocol function and/or have
strong WG support. Given the scope of this work as well as the
time the drafts have been active in the WG, we'd like to solicit
the WG's input on the publication track to be requested.

Once the WG reaches consensus on these drafts (as indicated by a
*future* WG last call), Standards Track publication can be
requested or these drafts could also be published via a
non-Standards Track, see section 4.2 of RFC2026 for all options.

Please let us know (preferably by responding on the WG list) if you:

a. Support targeting all of these documents for Standards Track

b. If no, support targeting some of these documents for Standards
   Track publication?
  [1, yes/no
   2, yes/no
   3, yes/no
   4, yes/no
   5, yes/no]

c. If no to any of the above, which status do you think appropriate?
  [Experimental or Informational]

d. Finally, we are most interested in hearing from anyone who has,
   or is planning an implementation based on the WG drafts.  We
   understand that some may not want this information published,
   so please let any of the chairs and/or ADs know (Lou,
   Deborah, Adrian or Stewart), and they will publish the
   information without any personal or company identification.

Keep in mind that this mail is *not* starting a WG last call on
any of the documents identified above.  We'd like input on
intended publication status prior to any last call discussion.

Lou and Deborah
CCAMP mailing list