Re: [dhcwg] Discussion on draft-yeh-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt "Prefix Pool Option for DHCPv6 Relay Agent"
Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Thu, 18 November 2010 03:44 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 B54943A6774 for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 19:44:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 Z4tPS0GYc-dM for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 19:44:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from exprod7og101.obsmtp.com (exprod7og101.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.155]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD0133A66B4 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 19:44:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from source ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob101.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTOShXdP4BNrkh/5Yij4s/cL2cW8NjFXH@postini.com; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 19:45:34 PST
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 68D571B8C7C; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 19:45:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from vpna-148.vpn.nominum.com (64.89.227.148) by exchange-01.win.nominum.com (64.89.228.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 19:45:31 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <027701cb86cc$87b83d80$9728b880$@com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:45:28 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <7F0B76DA-51D2-4317-AE0B-D5B969641A89@nominum.com>
References: <027701cb86cc$87b83d80$9728b880$@com>
To: Tina Tsou <tena@huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082)
Cc: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>, "draft-yeh-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt@tools.ietf.org" <draft-yeh-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Discussion on draft-yeh-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt "Prefix Pool Option for DHCPv6 Relay Agent"
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: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 03:44:48 -0000
On Nov 17, 2010, at 9:58 PM, Tina Tsou wrote: > It seems that the chairs should ask it. But I guess the author can also ask > it. Technically, the author asks for it, and then the chair does a consensus call. So what do people think? Anybody in favor? Anybody against? I will tally the responses next Wednesday and make a consensus call. You don't have to agree that the draft is complete as written--just that the working group should be doing the work the draft is trying to do.