RE: [NAT] Re: IESG review of draft-ietf-nat-interface-framework-0 3.txt

Thanks, Rohit.

Others - Please voice your thoughts (either way) and respond to the
questionaire so the ADs can assess the interest level from WG memebers.
Thanks.

cheers,
suresh

--- Rohit Rohit <Rohit.Rohit@worldwidepackets.com> wrote:
> Hi Suresh, 
> 
>    To write the MIB, we took this document
>    as the base. Most of the objects in the MIB
>    were derived from the interface framework draft.
> 
>    So i consider this document as very relevant 
>    to the WG.
> 
>    Even for our NAT MIB we have much more
>    private discussion than we have on the mailing list.
> 
>    I guess , more and more discussion should be on the mailing list
>    so that the correct amount of interest can be judged for the respective
> dratf.
> 
>    Thanks
>    Rohit
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pyda Srisuresh [mailto:srisuresh@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 4:15 PM
> To: nat@ietf.org
> Cc: srisuresh@yahoo.com; Allison Mankin; Scott Bradner; Matt Holdrege
> Subject: [NAT] Re: IESG review of
> draft-ietf-nat-interface-framework-03.txt
> 
> 
> Folks,
> 
> As you might have seen by now, the IESG response to 
> <draft-ietf-nat-interface-framework-03.txt>  raised a few
> serious points. Subsequent to the email response, I had
> a couple of e-mail exchanges with the ADs and per the AD's
> advice, I am listing below a plan of action.
> 
>    1. Interest level for the draft from the WG: 
> 
>       The IESG didnt find sufficient discussion on the draft on the 
>       mailing list, even though I did recieve private e-mails from 
>       some individuals. The IESG wants to assess what the interest
>       level is for the draft.
> 
>       Matt and I would appreciate if you could respond to the following
>       questionaire over the list. Thanks.
>       (a) Is the document relevant to the WG?
>       (b) Is there interest in seeing the document to completion 
>           within the WG?
>       (c) State reasons for your support or non-support of the document
>           in the WG.
> 
>    2. Reference to MIDCOM:
> 
>       This document is focussed on discussing NAT resources and an 
>       interface by which an external agent can influence NAT resources
>       and operation. As such, the reference to MIDCOM was done so the 
>       MIDCOM protocol could benefit from it. However, the IESG had
>       gotten the impression that this was mandating a requirement on 
>       MIDCOM protocol. 
> 
>       I dont have an issue with excising reference to MIDCOM from the 
>       draft(in the case we choose to pursue). Please let me know if
>       believe, this should not be the done.
> 
>    3. Lastly, as for the document quality issue, I will try and find a
>       co-author and spend additional effort fixing the document - only
>       when there is  manifestation of sufficient interest from the list. 
>       
> Thanks you for your time.
> 
> Regards,
> suresh 
> 
> =====
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Listen to your Yahoo! Mail messages from any phone.
> http://phone.yahoo.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nat mailing list
> nat@ietf.org
> http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat

=====

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Listen to your Yahoo! Mail messages from any phone.
http://phone.yahoo.com

_______________________________________________
nat mailing list
nat@ietf.org
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat