IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] I-D Action: draft-fuller-lisp-ddt-03.txt

jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Wed, 18 July 2012 13:50 UTC

Return-Path: <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70B2221F870A for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 06:50:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.241
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.241 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.358, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1kT00339EOVF for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 06:50:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C6A321F8713 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 06:50:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Postfix, from userid 11178) id 1C39618C0E9; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 09:50:55 -0400 (EDT)
To: lisp@ietf.org
Message-Id: <20120718135055.1C39618C0E9@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 09:50:55 -0400
From: jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
Cc: jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Re: [lisp] I-D Action: draft-fuller-lisp-ddt-03.txt
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lisp>
List-Post: <mailto:lisp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 13:50:06 -0000

    > will review it for the meeting.

Just out of curiousity (sorry if this has already been discussed, I'm a bit
out of it), is there some reason this is still draft-fuller and not
draft-ietf? I would assume this would want to become a WG work item - or does
it fall outside the current charter, or something? (Sorry, too lazy to go
take a look at the charter... :-)

	Noel

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email