Re: [Fecframe] draft-ietf-fecframe-pseudo-cdp WGLC

[Greg Shepherd <[e-mail]>]

I'm working on shepherd docs this week.

Greg

On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Ali C. Begen (abegen)
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> The current draft will expire soon. Is the WGLC ended? Can I submit a refresh?
>
> -acbegen
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Ali C. Begen (abegen)
>> Sent: Monday, April 09, 2012 11:47 AM
>> To: Luby, Michael; Greg Shepherd; Colin Perkins
>> Cc: [e-mail]
>> Subject: Re: [Fecframe] draft-ietf-fecframe-pseudo-cdp WGLC
>>
>> Well, the draft is informational not PS track. It simply tries to show a few examples for the use of framework.
>>
>> -acbegen
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Luby, Michael
>> > Sent: Monday, April 09, 2012 11:12 AM
>> > To: Greg Shepherd; Colin Perkins
>> > Cc: [e-mail]
>> > Subject: Re: [Fecframe] draft-ietf-fecframe-pseudo-cdp WGLC
>> >
>> > I started to read it but unfortunately have not yet read it thoroughly.  I
>> > agree with Colin in the sense that it doesn't seem to be on a standards
>> > track, it has some information in it that could be useful, if properly
>> > written (and could be standards track, if it was a lot more precise).  My
>> > sense was that it has a couple of examples but no real general techniques,
>> > there is some confusing terminology (or at least overused, same
>> > terminology used for different purposes), seems to make a lot of implicit
>> > assumptions that aren't spelled out that would be necessary for the
>> > particular examples to work,  and overall makes it hard to understand how
>> > to use this approach in general.  I would suggest a fairly substantial
>> > rethinking of this one.  Unfortunately, I won't have time to look at this
>> > again over the next two weeks.
>> > Mike
>> >
>> > On 4/9/12 6:20 AM, "Greg Shepherd" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> >
>> > >Thanks Colin!
>> > >
>> > >On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 5:12 AM, Colin Perkins <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> > >> Greg,
>> > >>
>> > >> I read this. It looks okay, and says that the pieces should be combined
>> > >>in the expected manner. My only real comment would be that it feels more
>> > >>informational than standards track, but I leave that decision for the WG
>> > >>chairs.
>> > >>
>> > >> Colin
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> On 22 Mar 2012, at 18:08, Greg Shepherd wrote:
>> > >>> Please resound ASAP. WG Consensus requires input from the WG.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Greg
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Greg Shepherd <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> > >>>> We're halfway through the two week timer and the list has been silent.
>> > >>>> We need "consensus" and that requires input from you. A vote of
>> > >>>> support IS feedback too. Please respond soon so we can progress.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Thanks,
>> > >>>> Greg
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Greg Shepherd <[e-mail]>
>> > >>>>wrote:
>> > >>>>> This starts a 2 week WGLC for Pseudo Content Delivery Protocol (CDP)
>> > >>>>> for Protecting Multiple Source Flows in FEC Framework,
>> > >>>>> draft-ietf-fecframe-pseudo-cdp-02:
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-fecframe-pseudo-cdp/
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Please read and respond to the list.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Thanks,
>> > >>>>> Greg
>> > >>> _______________________________________________
>> > >>> Fecframe mailing list
>> > >>> [e-mail]
>> > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fecframe
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> --
>> > >> Colin Perkins
>> > >> http://csperkins.org/
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >_______________________________________________
>> > >Fecframe mailing list
>> > >[e-mail]
>> > >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fecframe
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Fecframe mailing list
>> > [e-mail]
>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fecframe
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fecframe mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fecframe