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

Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com> Tue, 02 October 2012 15:15 UTC

Return-Path: <leeyoung@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2839121F853E for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 08:15:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nvlFVZ7E+8EF for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 08:15:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6473021F853D for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 08:15:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml203-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id ALG25977; Tue, 02 Oct 2012 15:15:46 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.241) by lhreml203-edg.huawei.com (172.18.7.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 16:15:38 +0100
Received: from DFWEML405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.102) by lhreml402-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.241) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 16:15:45 +0100
Received: from dfweml511-mbx.china.huawei.com ([169.254.16.239]) by dfweml405-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.102]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 08:15:43 -0700
From: Leeyoung <leeyoung@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: AQHNoKqXuJMrPJKG/0W/ESnIc/YZ/ZemH72w
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 15:15:42 +0000
Message-ID: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E172907AC47@dfweml511-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <506AFA9B.2000508@labn.net>
In-Reply-To: <506AFA9B.2000508@labn.net>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.192.11.176]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] 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: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 15:15:50 -0000

I support option (a). 

Young

-----Original Message-----
From: ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lou Berger
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2012 9:31 AM
To: CCAMP
Subject: [CCAMP] Input on publication track of WSON solutions documents

CCAMP,

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
   publication?
  [yes/no]

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
CCAMP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp