Re: [manet] Fwd: Call for acceptance as Working Group documents

Stan Ratliff <ratliffstan@gmail.com> Thu, 19 January 2017 16:50 UTC

Return-Path: <ratliffstan@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EB93129448 for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 08:50:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 VuPFfjVb4HPR for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 08:50:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io0-x22a.google.com (mail-io0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 700EC12945A for <manet@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 08:50:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id v96so42129174ioi.0 for <manet@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 08:50:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=X2g0vPAyOiCtVrWPq8JPswDcucI9yd22Z759GwUbMrc=; b=H0v1g6Ym2nEXOGeDdr9/JdwqdmuiD4UtNQaU6xrgJvnaPqYgAmpQmX+/hR2fgepdRj vw2xeaNC/wxXsmXXu1gegBG1iUoRlviFJxHO5rkTqP8QQ5jE9EyqEkQE/2we+iQQfmz8 XCpidc1uGxNkOu3En40ds3twsHkJp3btW5C33nZ+zBNrlyFq0TB5hMXeHR3yAJ20sImj x+eDM7hnk/Pj30Hn3lvW67v8ohuuptavgeaLXyXMJiuxfTeIzBpgLK4Mg/tRExuy2mm+ 3GTISJ8a6fz1nyjhP4ggpwJ2d32JGAerKRw2mvZthZXurXVucQvJ6gleWRi7hF0T5Xqz g8/Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=X2g0vPAyOiCtVrWPq8JPswDcucI9yd22Z759GwUbMrc=; b=aBRQUhwggxBlH5GcW42zNYDCemTAuSqxq+MLmZsewRztUeWQnH7WToRe4H/Aqnjzn5 DH0YqVZpHkIwOhC99dFgyWcNUCRvNk4grOqtg4mNMvKesYA/diSqr6O5D0JiuG4x19Oj HDBzCZG/SGDx0sXyouoq1plSVDwJD0lMub3Wt7TYbB2cf6f8J1R1G8e6CNUyCNWQvow6 kONKMzSt2FPb+GVvImIfMBVrXc4sPpV6q/Ld/4H0qF7jJmmdOfpl+EUyeTlA6A9Y6yVD A9uF591IOTg8wV+HmLmqbkQd8l2UQUTDw2eaA4DEBl/qc9TozWsL36CKSdOBqGdl/5d/ /UdA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXISRD05HSVCYsvySS9feVf4vueYN4T8nmt2FsT4I0y5v3IIcomyfjIX2m3DAXd1M/Vt21S7cNPVycpAzA==
X-Received: by 10.107.135.42 with SMTP id j42mr8933063iod.171.1484844647810; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 08:50:47 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.79.158.87 with HTTP; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 08:50:47 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <67fbb872-c2c6-19ec-c0c6-40a21600f959@labn.net>
References: <CALtoyokY4GE1LHeGjUXmrHT-TF+=t=QcLuzLpcs7pLBm0RDURQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALtoyokhJPhGdv_-wrGdJsHU=vu75DADU6VjZvV6BZZJtU17Rw@mail.gmail.com> <67fbb872-c2c6-19ec-c0c6-40a21600f959@labn.net>
From: Stan Ratliff <ratliffstan@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 11:50:47 -0500
Message-ID: <CALtoyokVwtCkd_z_r7N46+w=jmtc2pO-yrCxyM8Tyf2ux7VhdQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113eca08c7b204054675556b
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manet/WQsD-0In_UD-zPNq48NKBIvoAOY>
Cc: MANET IETF <manet@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [manet] Fwd: Call for acceptance as Working Group documents
X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks <manet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/manet/>
List-Post: <mailto:manet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 16:50:59 -0000

Lou,

Yes, that is a safe assumption.

Regards,
Stan


On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 11:49 AM, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> wrote:

> Stan,
>
>     Is it safe to assume that those who responded in support, don't need
> to restate their position?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lou
>
>
> On 1/19/2017 11:19 AM, Stan Ratliff wrote:
> > WG participants,
> >
> > Based on earlier complaints, we held off accepting these as WG
> > documents. The concerns about the "log jam" of documents appears to be
> > resolved, so I'm restarting this request. Please let the chairs know
> > your thoughts on acceptance by Feb 2.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Stan
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: *Stan Ratliff* <ratliffstan@gmail.com
> > <mailto:ratliffstan@gmail.com>>
> > Date: Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 10:26 AM
> > Subject: Call for acceptance as Working Group documents
> > To: MANET IETF <manet@ietf.org <mailto:manet@ietf.org>>
> >
> >
> > Hello working group participants,
> >
> > One of the items identified during the WG meeting in Seoul was to
> > formally request, via the list, Working Group adoption of 5 extension
> > drafts related to DLEP. This email is that formal request.
> >
> > The drafts are:
> > 1.
> > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cheng-manet-dlep-
> latency-extension-00.html
> > <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cheng-manet-dlep-
> latency-extension-00.html>
> > 2. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cheng-manet-dlep-pause-extension-00
> > <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cheng-manet-dlep-pause-extension-00>
> > 3. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cheng-manet-dlep-multi-
> hop-extension-00
> > <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cheng-manet-dlep-multi-
> hop-extension-00>
> > 4. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cheng-manet-dlep-da-
> credit-extension-00
> > <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cheng-manet-dlep-da-
> credit-extension-00>
> >
> > I have put all 4 extensions on this email for expediency only; please
> > do not assume that they must be adopted as a group. The chairs would
> > greatly appreciate thoughts from the WG, both positive and negative.
> >
> > For purposes of determining WG consensus, a lack of a response will be
> > seen as indicating support for adopting the draft (e.g. silence ==
> > acceptance).
> >
> > Regards,
> > Stan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > manet mailing list
> > manet@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet
>
>