Re: Support of address families in OSPFv3 - draft-mirtorabi-ospfv3-af-alt-00.txt

[Acee Lindem <[e-mail]>]

[e-mail] wrote:

>Acee,
>
>Just a minor concern. According to the ID-Nits
>(http://www.ietf.org/ID-nits.html) there shouldn't be more
>than 5 authors/editors for a draft.
>

Mukesh,

I'm not too concerned at this point since there are many RFCs and active
drafts with more than 5 authors. If the ADs complain vehemently when it
gets to AD
review phase then I'll opt out.

>
>This draft has 6.
>
>Do we need 6 authors/editors for a 6 page draft. Last page is
>just contact information about all the authors so effectively
>5 pages ;)
>
I don't think that length is the only metric by which we should judge
OSPF WG
documents. Note that the both the "Declaration of Independence" and
"Magna Carta"
are only a few pages (depending on you formatting) :^). Also, we did go
through a lot of
iterations with input from all the listed authors.

Thanks,
Acee

>
>I think, we should choose one editor and move others to contributors.
>
>Regards
>Mukesh
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Mailing List [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of ext
>>Acee Lindem
>>Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 2:34 PM
>>To: [e-mail]
>>Subject: Support of address families in OSPFv3 -
>>draft-mirtorabi-ospfv3-af-alt-00.txt
>>
>>
>>My reading at the OSPF WG meeting in Minneapolis was that there was
>>interest in making this
>>a WG document and adding the task of supporting multiple address
>>families in OSPFv3 as part
>>of the OSPF WG charter.  We agreed to take discussion to the list.
>>
>>Here is a link although I think a new revision is coming soon.
>>
>>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mirtorabi-ospfv3-af-
>>alt-00.txt
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Acee
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>