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

Lou,

I do support option a.

BR

/Dirk

Sent from a mobile device. Please excuse any spelling errors.

Am 02.10.2012 um 16:30 schrieb Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>:

> 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
> 