RE: Advancing the Protocol and Morin Drafts

["Ross Callon" <[e-mail]>]

Dave;

Prior to its becoming a working group document, the change authority
rests with the authors.  Once the WG accepts the document as a WG
document, then change control goes to the working group.  Then the WG
has authority to change the document according to consensus, and the
authors don't have the authority to refuse to make a change so long as
there is clear consensus in the working group for the change.  

Ross

-----Original Message-----
From: David Ward [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: 01 October 2008 12:16
To: Thomas Morin
Cc: David Ward; Marshall Eubanks; Ross Callon; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Advancing the Protocol and Morin Drafts

Should #2 come before #1?

-DWard

On Oct 1, 2008, at 11:05 AM, Thomas Morin wrote:

> Support this approach.
>
> (detailed input from chairs will be welcome on the precise changes  
> that
> are needed.)
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Thomas
>
> Marshall Eubanks :
>> This email starts a 3 week call for input, to expire October 23,  
>> 2008,
>> for the following steps:
>>
>> 1.) To accept draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations-03 as a working
>> group document;  and
>>
>> 2.) To turn this document into a requirements draft, with  
>> mandatory to
>> implement features for an interoperable implementation. The authors
>> have indicated that they are willing to do this.
>>
>> Our intention is, if this approach is accepted, to then begin WG last
>> call to submit to the IESG for publication:
>>
>> draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast
>> draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast-bgp
>>
>> We expect that these two documents will be submitted more or less  
>> as is
>> (i.e., certainly with any new bug fixes or other necessary  
>> corrections
>> and
>> improvements, but without specific mandatory to implement feature
>> description in those drafts).
>>
>> Please respond to the list with your recommendations for these two
>> courses of action.
>>
>> Regards
>> Marshall & Danny
>>
>