Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-10.txt
Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> Mon, 23 May 2011 16:18 UTC
Return-Path: <narten@us.ibm.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 195FDE0686 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 May 2011 09:18:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 ib7v72ZELknE for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 May 2011 09:18:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com (e31.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.149]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67A22E0684 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 May 2011 09:18:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from d03relay03.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.228]) by e31.co.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p4NG1sib007292 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 May 2011 10:01:54 -0600
Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (d03av04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.170]) by d03relay03.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p4NGI7Qi149328 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 May 2011 10:18:12 -0600
Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p4NAI60N019455 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 May 2011 04:18:06 -0600
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (sig-9-65-221-88.mts.ibm.com [9.65.221.88]) by d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id p4NAI5WT019376 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 May 2011 04:18:06 -0600
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.12.5) with ESMTP id p4NGI4sk010943 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 May 2011 12:18:04 -0400
Message-Id: <201105231618.p4NGI4sk010943@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
To: ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-10.txt
In-reply-to: <20110523161239.5901.5184.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <20110523161239.5901.5184.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Comments: In-reply-to internet-drafts@ietf.org message dated "Mon, 23 May 2011 09:12:39 -0700."
Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 12:18:04 -0400
From: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 16:18:34 -0000
WG, I believe this version is ready to advance to the IESG. >From the changes section: > 17.1. Appendix: Changes from -09 to -10 > > 1. With changes in requirements for IPsec and Routing Headers, > clarified language regarding processing of unknown options, and > removed paragraph lising which extension headers were required to > be implemented. Above changes are in Section 5.1. > 2. Removed "RFC4292-bis" from title. > 3. Expanded the text on Jumbograms. > 4. Changed recommendation of DHCPv6 from MAY to SHOULD. > 5. Expanded the text on RFC4191, and changed recommendation from MAY > to SHOULD. The last 3 changes have recently been discussed on the mailing list. Thomas
- I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-10.txt internet-drafts
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-10.t… Thomas Narten
- Advancing <draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-10.txt> Bob Hinden