Re: [mpls] Progressing Resdience Time Measurement draft

Hi Loa,

Totally agree with you, I agree on the fact that this draft should be progressed. 
I believe the feature is a really important one.

BR
Daniele

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Loa Andersson [mailto:loa@pi.nu]
> Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 7:23 PM
> To: Gregory Mirsky; mpls-chairs@ietf.org; mpls@ietf.org
> Cc: draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time@tools.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [mpls] Progressing Resdience Time Measurement draft
> 
> 
> Working Group and authors,
> 
> <chair hat off>
> As a matter of fact I believe this document should be progressed.
> <chair hat on>
> This draft has been a working group document since early August, but there
> has been no discussion on the document on the wg mailing list.
> 
> There are of course two ways if interpreting this.
> - there is total agreement on the draft
> - there is no intrest in the draft
> 
> I have no basis to decide which is the case.
> 
> Can we plese have at least a few (non-author) comments on the mailing list if
> it is time to start the wglc.
> 
> /Loa
> mpls wg co-chair
> 
> On 2015-12-15 07:21, Gregory Mirsky wrote:
> > Dear Chairs of the MPLS WG,
> >
> > authors of the Residence Time Measurement in MPLS Network draft
> > believe that all comments received during the WG adoption call been
> addressed.
> > Thus, authors would like to ask the WG Chairs to consider WG LC as the
> > next step.
> >
> >                  Regards,
> >
> >                                  Greg
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mpls mailing list
> > mpls@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
> >