IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00

"Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com> Fri, 07 September 2012 16:41 UTC

Return-Path: <volz@cisco.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 7C86221E804E for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Sep 2012 09:41:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 1q1TVmwUB7Zg for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Sep 2012 09:41:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E469B21E8034 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Sep 2012 09:41:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=859; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1347036075; x=1348245675; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=WwiiNs63ma3JFFZn3XXi8hVd7pZd6cIudcrboX78EG0=; b=B6MnV/ugZJMICEgjNzaFP0wmbPBANgaJgOygJsmupCRHmifip7gcrw2M 7etw3KPoB471axyvYSEuqFM6Ij3Gbu7Idmh2q7lEd1bEQImoVI8g81kkU XC4/8I+NKhBnnRKZNSrvOiy+09SCCCHSKvpTUBk9pA1AnMiZThDVn1JjQ U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AicFAHQiSlCtJXG9/2dsb2JhbABFhUC1fIEHgiABAQEEEgEnPwwEAgEIEQQBAQsUCQcyFAkIAgQOBQgah26bNaA/ixKFVGADpBKBZ4Jk
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,387,1344211200"; d="scan'208";a="119375536"
Received: from rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com ([173.37.113.189]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Sep 2012 16:41:14 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x11.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x11.cisco.com [173.37.183.85]) by rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q87GfEGS016677 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 7 Sep 2012 16:41:14 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com ([169.254.8.159]) by xhc-rcd-x11.cisco.com ([173.37.183.85]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Fri, 7 Sep 2012 11:41:14 -0500
From: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
Thread-Topic: WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00
Thread-Index: AQHNdqZP3dOUnDeDJkKs3MsN2OTAhpd/JdswgAB/xoD//5GrgIAAeqgA//+K+5A=
Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2012 16:41:13 +0000
Message-ID: <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E0F4F85BA@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com>
References: <0AE8374B-0E04-48FF-B71D-2EE8FAAC9ED1@nominum.com> <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E0F4F83D1@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <21C54D57-372F-46B0-892B-398919992546@nominum.com> <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E0F4F857F@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <CD3ECABE-12FB-428C-9FFF-078793B32C0E@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <CD3ECABE-12FB-428C-9FFF-078793B32C0E@nominum.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.86.244.254]
x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-10.2.0.1135-7.000.1014-19168.005
x-tm-as-result: No--28.232400-8.000000-31
x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No
x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: dhc WG <dhcwg@ietf.org>, "Ole Troan (otroan)" <otroan@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00
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: Fri, 07 Sep 2012 16:41:15 -0000

Ted:

Speaking for myself, I believe the answer is yes ... once I know what the scope of changes are (other than indicating that the document updates 3315/3633), I am happy to update and respin the document and do a second WG last call if the changes warrant or if the chairs or WG feels it is needed.

I too would like to have seen and see more people comment on this because there are some fairly significant changes. It also surprises me that few of the people that pushed for these changes have commented.

- Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: Ted Lemon [mailto:Ted.Lemon@nominum.com] 
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2012 12:22 PM
To: Bernie Volz (volz)
Cc: dhc WG; Wes Beebee (wbeebee); Hemant Singh (shemant); Ole Troan (otroan)
Subject: Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00

Was that a yes or a no?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email