Re: Informational RFC to be: draft-templin-ranger-09.txt

[The IESG <[e-mail]>]

The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'Routing and Addressing in Next-Generation EnteRprises (RANGER)' <draft-templin-ranger-09.txt> as an Informational RFC.

The IESG would also like the IRSG or RFC-Editor to review the comments in 
the datatracker 
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=17773&rfc_flag=0) 
related to this document and determine whether or not they merit 
incorporation into the document. Comments may exist in both the ballot 
and the comment log. 

The IESG contact person is Jari Arkko.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-templin-ranger-09.txt


The process for such documents is described at http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html.

Thank you,

The IESG Secretary

Technical Summary

   This document describes RANGER, an architecture for reducing
   routing scalability problems, allowing 

Working Group Summary

   This work is not associated with any working group or IETF
   activity.

Document Quality

   No technical review has been made.

Personnel

   The responsible AD is Jari Arkko.

RFC Editor Note

   The IESG has reviewed this document and believes that the following
   response from RFC 3932 Section 3 is appropriate:

   2. The IESG thinks that this work is related to IETF work done in
      the SHIM6, LISP, and MULTIPATH-TCP WGs, but this does not prevent
      publishing.

   (This is a change from a previous recommendation where we
   believed the below response was appropriate. A new document revision
   has resolved these concerns and the sponsoring AD will work with
   the authors to resolve the remaining ones.)

   3. The IESG thinks that publication is harmful to the IETF work done
      in SHIM6, LISP, and MULTIPATH-TCP WGs and recommends not publishing
      the document at this time.


IESG Note

   The following note from RFC 3932 Section 4 applies:

      This RFC is not a candidate for any level of Internet Standard.
      The IETF disclaims any knowledge of the fitness of this RFC for
      any purpose and notes that the decision to publish is not based on
      IETF review apart from IESG review for conflict with IETF work.
      The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at its
      discretion.  See RFC 3932 for more information.

   However, if this document is published as an RFC after the RFC
   3932bis and headers and boilerplates documents have been approved,
   no note
   is required.