Re: [Idr] 4byteASN?

Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com> Mon, 28 August 2006 18:55 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GHmGH-0007Up-DP; Mon, 28 Aug 2006 14:55:05 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GHmGG-0007Uk-Da for idr@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Aug 2006 14:55:04 -0400
Received: from mail-red.research.att.com ([192.20.225.110]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GHmGF-0008EC-6o for idr@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Aug 2006 14:55:04 -0400
Received: from bright.research.att.com (bright.research.att.com [135.207.20.189]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECED8147C71; Mon, 28 Aug 2006 14:55:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from fenner@localhost) by bright.research.att.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.10/Submit) id k7SIt2jJ015684; Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:55:02 -0700
From: Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com>
Message-Id: <200608281855.k7SIt2jJ015684@bright.research.att.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
To: Geoff Huston <gih@apnic.net>
Subject: Re: [Idr] 4byteASN?
References: <200608181252.CHH65179.FNNB@maem.org> <44E54D26.7090706@cisco.com> <200608181431.DGD82352.FNBN@maem.org> <7.0.0.16.2.20060827073433.0110e550@apnic.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:55:02 -0700
Versions: dmail (linux) 2.7/makemail 2.14
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8
Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, idr@ietf.org, MAEMURA Akinori <maem@maem.org>
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/idr>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: idr-bounces@ietf.org

>The pace of this document through IESG review so far is not exactly 
>quick to day the least.

You're right, it hasn't been.  I worked last week to get the
implementation report posted in preparation for IETF Last Call.
It's now posted, and the Last Call should go out today or
tomorrow.

>My question to the ADs is: why this document appears to be on such a 
>remarkably slow  IESG evaluation track?

The short answer is that it's not unusual.  While we have goals
that add up to about 1.5 months to get through the IESG, it's
common to miss the goals by an order of magnitude.
http://rtg.ietf.org:8080/Test/tracker_exceptions lists documents
by their desired action date; I've been working down this list by
worst-missed milestone and got to the as4bytes draft last week.

  Bill

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