IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] dhc WG last call on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-vendor-message-00

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Fri, 26 June 2009 17:39 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 123053A69A7 for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:39:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.389
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.389 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.210, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iIbsJOIA7urK for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:39:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og118.obsmtp.com (exprod7og118.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.8]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8289C3A6861 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:39:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from source ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob118.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKSkUHzcbMl9+1FbhWY1CLBP165UDePiPB@postini.com; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:40:11 PDT
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (webmail.nominum.com [64.89.228.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "webmail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D09A1BD6F3; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:39:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uma.here (71.32.40.139) by exchange-01.win.nominum.com (64.89.228.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.336.0; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:39:21 -0700
Message-ID: <F2E7FCAE-3E96-400F-8096-3A03D16E29DC@nominum.com>
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
To: Bud Millwood <budm@weird-solutions.com>
In-Reply-To: <200903171740.19574.budm@weird-solutions.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3)
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:39:19 -0700
References: <5033E739-18FA-4328-A276-E6D159052AAA@cisco.com> <200903171740.19574.budm@weird-solutions.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3)
Cc: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] dhc WG last call on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-vendor-message-00
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:39:53 -0000

Bud, when the wglc came out for the dhcpv4 and dhcpv6 versions of this  
draft, you responded positively to the dhcpv4 version, but not the  
dhcpv6 version.   Was that a deliberate or accidental omission?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email