[dhcwg] DHCwg adoption of draft-droms-dhc-dhcpv6-solmaxrt-update

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Thu, 13 December 2012 21:11 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E773521F88E7 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 13:11:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.573
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.573 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.026, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x4KXlzcwVXQX for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 13:11:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from exprod7og121.obsmtp.com (exprod7og121.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67D6621F858F for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 13:11:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob121.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUMpEioMohX7pSiXfr8hiJxjHKZG5iGT8@postini.com; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 13:11:38 PST
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E4CF1B8064 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 13:11:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-01.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0289F190052; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 13:11:38 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.133]) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.131]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 13:11:38 -0800
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
To: dhc WG <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: DHCwg adoption of draft-droms-dhc-dhcpv6-solmaxrt-update
Thread-Index: AQHN2XZwgdlSz8TwX06FA8Vxeyod6w==
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 21:11:37 +0000
Message-ID: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630747439368@mbx-01.win.nominum.com>
References: <BD87928F6BFAEF4EBEB883E1C4F58772222887D4@PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com>
In-Reply-To: <BD87928F6BFAEF4EBEB883E1C4F58772222887D4@PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.168.1.10]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2470E0CAE30E02459508A10A7182B78D@nominum.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
Subject: [dhcwg] DHCwg adoption of draft-droms-dhc-dhcpv6-solmaxrt-update
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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, 13 Dec 2012 21:11:39 -0000

On Aug 7, 2012, at 5:44 PM, "Brzozowski, John" <John_Brzozowski@Cable.Comcast.com> wrote:
> The following draft was discussed during dhcwg meeting during IETF83.  The draft was recently updated after being expired for a short period.  Based on the identified need and interest in this topic I have conferred with Ted and our ADs regarding next steps.  As such I would like to initiate a call to adopt this draft as a working group work item:

I'd just like to remind the authors that this document passed the call for adoption back in August, and no working group version of the draft has been submitted.   Do the authors intend to submit a working group version?   It was my understanding that there was some degree of urgency to this.