IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Asking again about draft-nadeau-ccamp-gmpls-oam-requirements

Reshad Rahman <rrahman@cisco.com> Tue, 16 October 2007 12:07 UTC

Return-path: <owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhlDF-0002dx-Q7 for ccamp-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 08:07:53 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhlDC-0000LY-CX for ccamp-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 08:07:50 -0400
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.67 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org>) id 1Ihl5D-0007yX-7Z for ccamp-data@psg.com; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:59:35 +0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.1 (2007-05-02) on psg.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.2.1
Received: from [171.71.176.70] (helo=sj-iport-1.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.67 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <rrahman@cisco.com>) id 1Ihl5A-0007y1-OP for ccamp@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:59:33 +0000
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,283,1188802800"; d="scan'208";a="23895427"
Received: from sj-dkim-4.cisco.com ([171.71.179.196]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 16 Oct 2007 04:59:32 -0700
Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (sj-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.177.237]) by sj-dkim-4.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l9GBxWV6007736; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 04:59:32 -0700
Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id l9GBxUxD020605; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:59:32 GMT
Received: from xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.38]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 16 Oct 2007 07:59:07 -0400
Received: from [10.82.242.131] ([10.82.242.131]) by xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 16 Oct 2007 07:59:06 -0400
Message-ID: <4714A782.3000107@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 07:58:58 -0400
From: Reshad Rahman <rrahman@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
CC: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: Asking again about draft-nadeau-ccamp-gmpls-oam-requirements
References: <0e8601c80d9b$59115820$5102010a@your029b8cecfe>
In-Reply-To: <0e8601c80d9b$59115820$5102010a@your029b8cecfe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Oct 2007 11:59:07.0059 (UTC) FILETIME=[F44EB830:01C80FEB]
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: SMEX-8.0.0.1181-5.000.1023-15486.002
X-TM-AS-Result: No--11.315300-8.000000-31
X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: No
X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No
DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=680; t=1192535972; x=1193399972; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim4002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=rrahman@cisco.com; z=From:=20Reshad=20Rahman=20<rrahman@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20Asking=20again=20about=20draft-nadeau-ccamp-gmpls-oam -requirements |Sender:=20; bh=HmWMNmeC1vHDPh3qp8IFpTuR1x9oce8qIy/h5mgL514=; b=Uzve3I+9K7lJvj7oPDxrTmS34ynjhW2FKSGIgxIV+Us6QSyU1uASph/tRqVCqO+yQkeEFVwH CumFsbfgBGR5IvcBYbRX58WLOV8ypAk1gANVNRaetIdbXgycf3vWLL0o;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-4; header.From=rrahman@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim4002 verified; );
Sender: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 0bc60ec82efc80c84b8d02f4b0e4de22

In favour.

Regards,
Reshad.

Adrian Farrel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When we asked about adopting 
> draft-nadeau-ccamp-gmpls-oam-requirements-01.txt as a WG document we 
> didn't get thorough consensus, and since both Deborah and I are 
> authors on the draft, we decided we should play it very safe.
>
> The new revision, draft-nadeau-ccamp-gmpls-oam-requirements-02.txt, 
> attempts to reach closure on the issues raised when we polled the 
> list, and some of our own concerns.
>
> So, second time of asking...
>
> Do you think draft-nadeau-ccamp-gmpls-oam-requirements-02.txt should 
> be adopted as a CCAMP working group draft?
>
> Thanks,
> Adrian
>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email