Re: [mpls] poll to see if we have consensus to adopt two document (mpls-static and mpls-base)

Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Tue, 07 June 2016 19:29 UTC

Return-Path: <loa@pi.nu>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFB1612D127; Tue, 7 Jun 2016 12:29:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.326
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.326 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 v0gacl_AdaPj; Tue, 7 Jun 2016 12:29:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B836712D504; Tue, 7 Jun 2016 12:29:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.102] (81-236-221-144-no93.tbcn.telia.com [81.236.221.144]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 11AE918013E4; Tue, 7 Jun 2016 21:29:00 +0200 (CEST)
To: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
References: <729f6a0b-6222-7100-3b79-2291870d4421@pi.nu>
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
Message-ID: <0927425d-2c34-7a21-e9b2-9fcd632fc427@pi.nu>
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2016 21:28:54 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <729f6a0b-6222-7100-3b79-2291870d4421@pi.nu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/4UKcfgmPcIzEhAk-uY1JgrUxM1o>
Cc: draft-saad-mpls-base-yang@ietf.org, draft-saad-mpls-static-yang@ietf.org, "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] poll to see if we have consensus to adopt two document (mpls-static and mpls-base)
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2016 19:29:04 -0000

Working Group,

Thesd working group adoption polls are closed, and we have two new
working group documents.

The authors should re-post the documents as:

- draft-ietf-mpls-static-yang-00 and;
- draft-ietf-mpls-base-yang-00

Without any other changes than the administrative infomation (filename,
version and dates).

Also note that all the authors/contributors has stated on the working
group mailing-list that they are unaware of any other IPRs than what
has been disclosed to the IETF.

/Loa



On 2016-05-18 12:01, Loa Andersson wrote:
>
> Working Group,
>
> This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-saad-mpls-static-
> yang-03 and draft-saad-mpls-base-yang-00 as MPLS working group
> documents.
>
> Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working
> group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org) Please give a technical
> motivation for your support/not support, especially if you think that
> the document should not be adopted as a working group document.
>
> There are no IPR disclosures against either document. An IPR poll has
> been started in parallel to this adoption poll
>
> The working group adoption poll ends June 2, 2016, given that the IPR
> poll has concluded.
>
> /Loa
>
> MPLS wg co-chair.