Re: [mpls] Closed - Re: Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-udp-return-path

[Stewart Bryant <[e-mail]>]

I know of no changes needed to the current version.

- Stewart

On 28/09/2015 07:04, Loa Andersson wrote:
> Working Group,
>
> This working last call has concluded, we only have supportive comments.
>
> Authors,
>
> Can you plese verify that you want to go ahead and request publication
> for the current version (or make necessary updates and repost a new
> version).
>
> /Loa
> mpls wg co-chair
>
> On 2015-09-04 18:22, Loa Andersson wrote:
>> Working Group,
>>
>> This is to start a two week working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-
>> rfc6374-udp-return-path.
>>
>> Please send your comments to the mpls wg mailing list ([e-mail])
>>
>> An IPR poll has been completed before the wglc, all co-authors has
>> stated that they are unaware of any IPRs that relates to this document.
>>
>>
>> This working group last call ends September 19, 2015.
>>
>> For this document we would like to add a few comments/concerns.
>>
>> As working group chairs.
>>
>> This document was accept as working group document in August
>> 2014, there has been four versions since it became a working group
>> draft. I changes are not critical, but there are a number of them. Since
>> we accepted the document there has been no discussion on the list.
>>
>> In particular there is a section (part of 3.1) that the RFC Editor is
>> (correctly) requested to remove before publication. This section
>> discusses alternatives to the solution the author choose. As far as we
>> can see there has been no discussion on the mailing on the alternatives
>> on the mailing list after the draft became a working group document.
>>
>> For those reason we would like to solicit careful reviews during the
>> working group last and explicit comments of the section to be removed.
>>
>> An individual comment.
>>
>> I have reviewed the document and sent comments (mostly nits) to the
>> authors I believe the document is in pretty good shape. I have no
>> concerns on the document as such, more that I don't have proof of
>> working group support and engagement.
>>
>> /Loa
>> for the mpls wg co-chairs
>>
>>
>


-- 
For corporate legal information go to:

http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html