Re: [dhcwg] stalled (?) dhc WG documents

Kim Kinnear <kkinnear@cisco.com> writes:

> >draft-ietf-dhc-agent-subnet-selection-00.txt (discussed in Minneapolis
> >                                             -- what was the
> >                                             resolution and next steps?)

>         I was going to revise it based on the comments in MN and
>         based on whatever you told me was feedback from the IESG
>         as far as IETF last call (a title change at least to add
>         IPv4, as well as other comments I haven't yet received from
>         you).

I think I've sent you all the comments I have. But if you point me to
a copy of the revised ID before you send it in I will double check.

>         As the comments in MN only touched on a relatively minor
>         part of the draft (sending the sub-option back to the
>         client if you used it), then I was assuming that we
>         didn't need to go through WG last call again, but I'm
>         open to suggestion on that.

>         So, I see the following possible approaches:

>           a) I revise the draft based on IESG comments and MN
>           comments and we are done (based of course on the IESG
>           comments and some final review of the result).

This seems fine to me, though I think "some final review of the
result" could in practice be a one-week WG last call. Especially if a
few folks quickly chime in and say "I've read the new text and its
good".

Thomas

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg