Re: [pmtud] Status of the method draft

Matthew J Zekauskas <> Fri, 01 September 2006 10:51 UTC

Received: from [] ( by with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GJ6ch-0004jF-Uh; Fri, 01 Sep 2006 06:51:43 -0400
Received: from [] ( by with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GJ6cg-0004iS-UO for; Fri, 01 Sep 2006 06:51:42 -0400
Received: from ([]) by with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GJ6cf-0000bm-NA for; Fri, 01 Sep 2006 06:51:42 -0400
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ED9247CE0 for <>; Fri, 1 Sep 2006 06:51:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 30750-10 for <>; Fri, 1 Sep 2006 06:51:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [] (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AAD947C74 for <>; Fri, 1 Sep 2006 06:51:40 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2006 06:51:37 -0400
From: Matthew J Zekauskas <>
User-Agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20060719)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [pmtud] Status of the method draft
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by virus scanner
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 39bd8f8cbb76cae18b7e23f7cf6b2b9f
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Path Maximum Transmission Unit Discovery <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>

To reiterate what Matt M posted to the list yesterday:

Well, the revisions took longer than I expected, and there was an error
in the submission of the -08 revision (an interim version was
submitted).  However, the -09 version is now out, and I believe it
addresses all the comments during last call.  I reviewed all the
modifications, and believe they are all clarifications and writing

In addition, we expect a somewhat longer-than-normal IETF last call for
this document, since it is the significant output of the WG, so there
should still be plenty of time to comment if you have not had a chance
to do so already.

Therefore, I shall submit the -09 version to the IESG for consideration
as a proposed standard.  Thanks to all that contributed to this draft.


On 8/4/2006 9:10 PM, Matthew J Zekauskas wrote:
> WGLC ended 7/24, with no dissent and three very thorough reviews.  The
> authors are currently revising the document to reflect the feedback
> (mostly nits and clarifications, although there were two requests for
> standards language (2119) insertion and some of the
> clarification-related comments could trigger larger changes).
> There is already a preliminary revision available to the folks that
> commented.
> Assuming the revision contains only clarifications, I will forward it
> along to the IESG.  If there are any significant changes, I'll do a
> quick additional last call.
> Thanks to all that read the document and commented publicly.
> --Matt

pmtud mailing list