Re: [dhcwg] WG last call on draft-ietf-dhc-failover-12.txt

At 11:46 AM 11/4/2003, Greg Kilfoyle wrote:
>I decided to take a more active role in this WG rather than be a casual
>observer. I don't have others' advantage (?) of going through the
>evolution of this draft - it's a lot to consume all at once.

        On the other hand, (as you have already shown below) you
        may well see things that other folks will overlook
        because they've read it too many times already.


>I'm also not sure what qualifies a person for voting on a draft. Is it
>just a member of this list that has read the draft or is there more to
>it?

        Those are precisely the qualifications necessary -- you
        have to be on this list, and (while there won't be a pop
        quiz to verify this) it is considered appropriate to have
        read a draft on which you wish to comment.


>I'm in favor for advancing this draft except for 1 item which I need
>cleared up - the payload offset is listed as 8 bytes but it appears to
>me it should be 12 bytes. The ISC code has it as 12 bytes.

        Nice catch -- you are correct, it should be 12 bytes.

        We'll make that correction when we next update the draft.

        Cheers -- Kim


>Cheers, Greg. 
>-- 
>Greg Kilfoyle <gregk@redback.com>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>dhcwg mailing list
>dhcwg@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg 


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