[OSPF] RFC6506 Bis Draft as OSPF WG Document

Acee Lindem <acee@lindem.com> Sat, 10 August 2013 23:14 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@lindem.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01D5F11E80D2 for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 10 Aug 2013 16:14:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ldcpNGWHhO00 for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 10 Aug 2013 16:14:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com (cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com [75.180.132.120]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E728C21F9223 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Aug 2013 16:06:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=TPPHuiZa c=1 sm=0 a=C2g1Hp6idNFTy4K9KrF8yg==:17 a=x7FEv9pE1mkA:10 a=vErhmaPM-wEA:10 a=Wma4Of2gTTwA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=QYaTxUjTAAAA:8 a=KGjhK52YXX0A:10 a=ybZnzFyYZQMA:10 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=VJ3LcXVN-qw1gMotBdkA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=C2g1Hp6idNFTy4K9KrF8yg==:117
X-Cloudmark-Score: 0
X-Authenticated-User:
X-Originating-IP: 65.190.0.120
Received: from [65.190.0.120] ([65.190.0.120:64116] helo=[192.168.1.106]) by cdptpa-oedge04.mail.rr.com (envelope-from <acee@lindem.com>) (ecelerity 2.2.3.46 r()) with ESMTP id B5/09-14128-887C6025; Sat, 10 Aug 2013 23:06:49 +0000
From: Acee Lindem <acee@lindem.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2013 19:06:47 -0400
Message-Id: <644A5B64-94D0-4A2E-9076-6593DB1F7C1F@lindem.com>
To: OSPF List <ospf@ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085)
Cc: Sean Turner <turners@ieca.com>
Subject: [OSPF] RFC6506 Bis Draft as OSPF WG Document
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ospf>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2013 23:14:12 -0000

Due to a couple errata on RFC 6506, I made the decision to respin the RFC in an effort to ensure compatibility between implementations and as a service to the OSPF community. At IETF 87, discussions with our AD and polling at the WG meeting indicating support of making this a WG document. 
At this time, I'd like to ask if anyone is opposed to making this a WG document? The intent would be to move swiftly to WG last call. 

For your convenience, here is the URL: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-acee-ospf-rfc6506bis-03.txt

Thanks,
Acee