Re: [MEXT] MEXT WG drafts (re)naming and submission

Basavaraj Patil wrote:
> RFC4285bis is a minor bug fix w.r.t the key length.
> If MEXT does not want to make this a WG doc, we can maybe progress it as a
> MIP6 WG doc.
> It has already completed WG LC in August, 07.
> Hence I have no problem forwarding it to the IESG for processing as a MIP6
> WG doc.

Ok, then it was just waiting for the document shepherd writeup.
Now I don't see any reason for this to be published as an
individual submission.

Vijay

> 
> -Raj 
> 
> 
> On 12/18/07 1:01 PM, "ext Vijay Devarapalli"
> <vijay.devarapalli@azairenet.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Julien,
>>
>> Julien Laganier wrote:
>>
>>> Previous WG drafts that the WG hasn't agreed to take as WG drafts, or
>>> have no corresponding work item in MEXT charter must not be submitted
>>> as draft-ietf-{mext,mip6,nemo,monami6}-*. Of course authors are free to
>>> submit them as individual submission, e.g. draft-*-mext-*:
>>>
>>>         draft-ietf-nemo-prefix-delegation
>>>         draft-ietf-nemo-dhcpv6-pd
>>>         draft-ietf-mip6-rfc4285bis
>> 4285bis mainly fixes a bug (key length) in RFC 4285. In fact I thought
>> it was ready for a MIP6 WG last call. Raj, please correct me if I am
>> wrong. I think this document should be a MEXT WG document.
>>
>> Regarding the other changes in the document (for example removing the
>> IESG note) should of course be discussed on the MEXT mailing list.
>>
>>>         draft-ietf-mip6-generic-notification-message
>> I thought we concluded we missed this document somehow and needs to be
>> added to the charter?
>>
>> Vijay
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> MEXT mailing list
>> MEXT@ietf.org
>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
> 

_______________________________________________
MEXT mailing list
MEXT@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext