IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [l2vpn] WG last call for draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-reqt-03 - extended call

Lucy yong <lucy.yong@huawei.com> Fri, 30 November 2012 20:56 UTC

Return-Path: <lucy.yong@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C297A21F8488 for <l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 12:56:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.548
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 ws3PeHvuJBGq for <l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 12:56:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA2D321F8D47 for <l2vpn@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 12:56:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml203-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id ANJ29966; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 20:56:18 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.217) by lhreml203-edg.huawei.com (172.18.7.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 20:55:59 +0000
Received: from DFWEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.203) by lhreml403-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.217) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 20:56:15 +0000
Received: from DFWEML505-MBB.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.192]) by dfweml404-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.203]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 12:56:10 -0800
From: Lucy yong <lucy.yong@huawei.com>
To: "Bitar, Nabil N" <nabil.n.bitar@verizon.com>, "l2vpn@ietf.org" <l2vpn@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [l2vpn] WG last call for draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-reqt-03 - extended call
Thread-Topic: [l2vpn] WG last call for draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-reqt-03 - extended call
Thread-Index: Ac3PFAl2bpEV4FmZR4qc0BrCQcPi1AAKICpw
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 20:56:09 +0000
Message-ID: <2691CE0099834E4A9C5044EEC662BB9D44853412@dfweml505-mbb.china.huawei.com>
References: <CCB93484.66BF5%nabil.n.bitar@verizon.com> <CCDE1CF0.6BC8F%nabil.n.bitar@verizon.com>
In-Reply-To: <CCDE1CF0.6BC8F%nabil.n.bitar@verizon.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.47.85.255]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_2691CE0099834E4A9C5044EEC662BB9D44853412dfweml505mbbchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Cc: Giles Heron <giheron@cisco.com>
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <l2vpn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/l2vpn>, <mailto:l2vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/l2vpn>
List-Post: <mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l2vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2vpn>, <mailto:l2vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 20:56:23 -0000

Hi Nabil,

It is my understanding  that IETF process for a last call do not require an explicit support in the e-mail, individuals only need to voice up if he/she has a comment on the draft. Thus if there is no any feedback on it, it means everyone support without any comment.  Is that right?

Thanks,
Lucy

From: l2vpn-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:l2vpn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bitar, Nabil N
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 10:02 AM
To: l2vpn@ietf.org
Cc: Giles Heron
Subject: [l2vpn] WG last call for draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-reqt-03 - extended call
Importance: High

Hi,
The WG last call passed without any feedback. We would like the working group to take another look at this because it will be hard to gage support for a draft or move it forward without feedback.
Thus, we decided to give it another try.. We are issuing or extending the  WG Last call for the draft   "Requirements for MEF E-Tree
Support in L2VPN" which can be found at  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-reqt-03

Please, review the draft and send any comments to the L2VPN working group email list.  Please, indicate if you support moving the draft forward.
You are encouraged to send extensive comments as you see fit.

The extended Working group last call will close on Friday December 7, 2012.

Thanks,
Nabil & Giles





From: <Bitar>, Nabil Bitar <nabil.n.bitar@verizon.com<mailto:nabil.n.bitar@verizon.com>>
Date: Friday, November 2, 2012 7:43 AM
To: "l2vpn@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>" <l2vpn@ietf.org<mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>>
Cc: Giles Heron <giheron@cisco.com<mailto:giheron@cisco.com>>
Subject: [l2vpn] WG last call for draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-reqt-03


Hi,
This is the start of a two-week working group last call on the draft "Requirements for MEF E-Tree
Support in L2VPN".  The draft can be found at  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-reqt-03

Please, review the draft and send any comments to the L2VPN working group email list. You are encouraged to send extensive comments as you see fit.

This WG last call will close on Friday November 16th, 2012.

Regards,
Giles & Nabil

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email