IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [coman] are we there yet?

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Mon, 11 March 2013 21:19 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: coman@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: coman@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88DE721F8E6D for <coman@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Mar 2013 14:19:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.431
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.431 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.143, BAYES_00=-2.599, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fwzcagy3EGbI for <coman@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Mar 2013 14:19:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [176.58.120.209]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8A3921F8CBD for <coman@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Mar 2013 14:19:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (unknown [130.129.20.151]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E7A722060; Mon, 11 Mar 2013 21:19:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from sandelman.ca (quigon.sandelman.ca [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5477BCA0BC; Mon, 11 Mar 2013 17:19:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)" <mehmet.ersue@nsn.com>
In-reply-to: <E4DE949E6CE3E34993A2FF8AE79131F80655D7@DEMUMBX005.nsn-intra.net>
References: <22677.1363008722@sandelman.ca> <E4DE949E6CE3E34993A2FF8AE79131F80655D7@DEMUMBX005.nsn-intra.net>
Comments: In-reply-to "Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)" <mehmet.ersue@nsn.com> message dated "Mon, 11 Mar 2013 14:02:25 -0000."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.3; nmh 1.3; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 22)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 17:19:25 -0400
Message-ID: <3007.1363036765@sandelman.ca>
Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca
Cc: "coman@ietf.org" <coman@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [coman] are we there yet?
X-BeenThere: coman@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Management of Constrained Networks and Devices <coman.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/coman>, <mailto:coman-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/coman>
List-Post: <mailto:coman@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:coman-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/coman>, <mailto:coman-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 21:19:26 -0000

>>>>> "NSN" == NSN  <Ersue> writes:
    NSN> Forming a WG is an option. However, we have left this open and
    NSN> dependent on the community interest.

    NSN> Do you think it is important and should be pushed?

    NSN> Can folks please comment on the draft recently submitted?

I'm afraid I don't know which draft that is.
I'm guessing... draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-03  ??


-- 
Michael Richardson
-on the road-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email