Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-special-purpose-labels-05
Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Thu, 27 March 2014 07:13 UTC
Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EA831A01F6; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 00:13:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NcgiuqFBJdlr; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 00:12:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AF8E1A023D; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 00:12:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F2192CC5F; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 09:12:36 +0200 (EET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1XZ6If3ohaFd; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 09:12:35 +0200 (EET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BC1D2CC48; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 09:12:34 +0200 (EET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-special-purpose-labels-05
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <080e01cf3165$7adb15f0$709141d0$@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 09:12:34 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <36AB8972-75CC-42CE-8747-40697E50B4EE@piuha.net>
References: <07cd01cf3155$64d69780$2e83c680$@gmail.com> <074c01cf3157$3b8b3b90$b2a1b2b0$@olddog.co.uk> <080e01cf3165$7adb15f0$709141d0$@gmail.com>
To: Roni Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>, "adrian@olddog.co.uk Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/IGObgJk_sKGhtVAwHK_bnABJGr8
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mpls-special-purpose-labels.all@tools.ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 07:13:09 -0000
I am reviewing the state of this document in preparation for today's IESG telechat where this document is on the agenda. Thanks for the review, Roni. I do not have a strong position on the retirement topic either. I think the current text is acceptable, given the explanation of the situation. Jari On Feb 24, 2014, at 3:36 PM, Roni Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Adrian, > I do not have a strong position on this topic ( I can agree that deprecating > a code point is a rare case) , I was wondering why the difference and I can > agree with any direction that you will choose about the maturity level > needed > Roni