Re: [dhcwg] New Version Notification for draft-sarikaya-nvo3-dhc-vxlan-multicast-00.txt

On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Bernie Volz (volz) <volz@cisco.com> wrote:

> I agree. Though there now has been some discussion :).
>
> As this is now targeted at nvo3, I don't see a strong need for a
> presentation in dhc at this time. If the nvo3 adopts this work (i.e.,
> believes it is a problem that needs a solution), we can revisit for a
> future presentation? Of course, you should continue to make the dhc aware
> of the progress of this draft and collecting input when offered or if you
> raise specific issues or questions.
>
> It is odd that this isn't on the nvo3 agenda (at least at present), as it
> would seem to be more appropriate there as the intended WG.
>
>
Bernie, I presented it in nvo3 in Vancouver, this time we did not ask a
slot. About dhc presentation slot, it is up to you, I remember last time we
were assigned a slot but never had a chance.

We would like to clarify all the comments made so far, right now Ted's
comment has not yet been resolved, we are waiting for his reply.

Regards,

Behcet

> ---
>
> General comment about many individual drafts:
>
> I think that people that submit individual drafts don't always take the
> next [manual] step to notify the DHC WG of that draft. They (mistakenly)
> believe somehow that the "group" is notified when it isn't (the main ietf
> mailing list gets the notice, but not the dhc wg).
>
> I would highly recommend that any new or updated draft posting (whether WG
> document or individual) is followed up with an email to the DHC WG:
> - for new drafts, explain it (perhaps by using the abstract or
> introduction) and why you feel it is important to the WG and what you want
> the WG to do with the draft (if individual). Think of this as presenting
> the main points and what areas you feel the WG may want to review or have a
> particular concern about.
> - for updates, indicate what has changed and why. And for individual,
> again indicate what you want the WG to do next with the draft. Is it FYI?
> Is it because you feel it is ready for adoption and will propose a call
> shortly? ...
>
> There are some WGs where the chairs do post "a new draft or new revision
> has been posted" (for individual drafts related to the WG). But in the DHC
> WG we assume that the authors will do this and expect them to - the chairs
> have enough to do!
>
> - Bernie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dhcwg [mailto:dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ted Lemon
> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 2:20 PM
> To: Bernie Volz (volz)
> Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org; Dhc Chairs
> Subject: Re: [dhcwg] New Version Notification for
> draft-sarikaya-nvo3-dhc-vxlan-multicast-00.txt
>
> Before the working group hears a presentation on this, it would be good if
> Behcet could answer the question I asked on the mailing list.   If the
> draft isn't important enough to discuss on the mailing list, it surely
> doesn't need time on the schedule in London!
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>