Re: [OPSAWG] Martin Stiemerling's No Objection on draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-use-cases-04: (with COMMENT)
Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Tue, 17 February 2015 22:27 UTC
Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DADD71A88C1 for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 14:27:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=unavailable
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 rrjUngXqySSN for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 14:27:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com (mail-wi0-f174.google.com [209.85.212.174]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A10301A88F8 for <opsawg@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 14:27:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f174.google.com with SMTP id em10so37197659wid.1 for <opsawg@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 14:27:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=MXR+dFyfgnoXmLY4SYmnDSBg5xO4YFcYKnUVt3T2gqw=; b=XtPQUUwIw79yXuAXwjuWJjiGeA0Vxrrz5M+EGcDZ2ORQQvO3nrehshBLYC/bezAyKC ekee1Qqt5LXz9VyhgFeXFenWkLd5G1zNcX/mMQF6+DC32GIAGD/2oH4nERVksod+G8+C c3Ec+F7GO5zbXKFf/Os2OL144fCVHnniW/yZczWo636sKodXQt/jf9z/w7R5zQTlb2qL OMweh/8np2+Ou/0F1p1bIyjK9o8D1rwtLPsDc89FB3Z6+Osyp6aOzb+vW/yoTDen9NT3 4MufJO0bKDKF4B+3InuXnbA9m3iuB+2Fzt6t1117WUtEzL8Frvudm26zWn3mKeG1omj5 V2/g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnQbmXuKMA9pS+BnxMZ/GsHKUXaunJ85H7AFfGR8wtjYsQ5GaEZo1KoUX2pY9Cz1LcV38fY
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.84.100 with SMTP id x4mr51492314wiy.89.1424212040422; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 14:27:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.194.158.229 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 14:27:20 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20150217211710.20512.95285.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <20150217211710.20512.95285.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 17:27:20 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHw9_iL2-DbsCTxK13wOgTurc424cR5OkF=dyNJH6yyoiG9Lvw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
To: Martin Stiemerling <mls.ietf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/W30S7vCGwDACbLrGyHmRI-wuyA0>
Cc: "opsawg@ietf.org" <opsawg@ietf.org>, "opsawg-chairs@ietf.org" <opsawg-chairs@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-use-cases.all@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Martin Stiemerling's No Objection on draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-use-cases-04: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/opsawg/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 22:27:24 -0000
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Martin Stiemerling <mls.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: > Martin Stiemerling has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-use-cases-04: No Objection [ SNIP ] > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The write-up says something about additional reviews. Does this include > reviews by an outside party of the IETF that, for instance, an entity > that operates building automation systems? > Apologies, I (doc shepherd) was unclear - the additional reviews was Thomas and Pascal asking participants in 6TiSCH and 6lo (IPv6 over Networks of Resource-constrained Nodes) to review. -- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf
- [OPSAWG] Martin Stiemerling's No Objection on dra… Martin Stiemerling
- Re: [OPSAWG] Martin Stiemerling's No Objection on… Warren Kumari