Re: [Roll] reminder - end of second WG LC

JP Vasseur <jpv@cisco.com> Thu, 24 May 2012 13:28 UTC

Return-Path: <jpv@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B4D621F8679 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 May 2012 06:28:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.06
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.06 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.538, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 BRazq3oGu6XQ for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 May 2012 06:27:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bgl-iport-1.cisco.com (bgl-iport-1.cisco.com [72.163.197.25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 116E821F864D for <roll@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 May 2012 06:27:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=jpv@cisco.com; l=31609; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1337866077; x=1339075677; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id: references:to; bh=h5VVyIrKqIaLP4EP0XAZwTkw+Df10DMdQuFAtCSo/f4=; b=D9H7cJoJLmeoye3ZlBtFXZ4IbPlqdy83ln/UDU5fAzxPQbcwnYOyuHDD nbZorc6rUEJnlVEVomR8U4cEuaEq3viboOaE29ZDX1olHaF8jewKvmAyX yH8YoMAQJB8u75OvWVyX5rZblQyE731sTeVq6T/Es8mqevaaUZ7+S/PTX s=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqYEACE2vk9Io8UY/2dsb2JhbABDgkVYsjCCFQEBAQMBAQEBDwFbCwULCxEDAQEBASABBgcnHwkIBhMJGYdmBQubJZ98in8khBxgA5UYhU+IPYFkgmw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.75,651,1330905600"; d="scan'208,217"; a="12931646"
Received: from vla196-nat.cisco.com (HELO bgl-core-2.cisco.com) ([72.163.197.24]) by bgl-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 24 May 2012 13:27:55 +0000
Received: from xbh-hkg-412.apac.cisco.com (xbh-hkg-412.cisco.com [64.104.123.69]) by bgl-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q4ODRsdP031257; Thu, 24 May 2012 13:27:54 GMT
Received: from xfe-hkg-412.apac.cisco.com ([64.104.123.71]) by xbh-hkg-412.apac.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 24 May 2012 21:27:54 +0800
Received: from [10.60.114.229] ([10.60.114.229]) by xfe-hkg-412.apac.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 24 May 2012 21:27:49 +0800
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F23BDD04-B74C-4ACB-A56D-8323D2DA98CA"
From: JP Vasseur <jpv@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD806B0AF@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 15:27:46 +0200
Message-Id: <04955E8C-5BBD-4B8A-9C59-F643E9C4269E@cisco.com>
References: <9850315F-B3E6-4A29-AAD5-B53E6C978F69@thomasclausen.org> <66E2061B-4866-4276-B69A-6FD150D6EB93@cisco.com> <258174AC-25D5-447B-B9A1-11DE371CACD3@cisco.com> <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD806B0AF@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 May 2012 13:27:49.0325 (UTC) FILETIME=[036F8FD0:01CD39B1]
Cc: roll WG <roll@ietf.org>, Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>
Subject: Re: [Roll] reminder - end of second WG LC
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 13:28:00 -0000

No, both documents are still under WG Last call.

Thanks.

JP.

On May 24, 2012, at 1:55 PM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote:

> JP:
>  
> I find that draft-ietf-roll-p2p-rpl-12 is ready for IESG review.
> Thanks a bunch to the authors and, in particular, to Mukul for all this hard work.
>  
> Cheers,
>  
> Pascal
>  
> From: roll-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:roll-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of JP Vasseur
> Sent: mercredi 23 mai 2012 23:44
> To: roll WG
> Cc: Michael Richardson
> Subject: [Roll] reminder - end of second WG LC
>  
> Second last call on
>  
> * draft-ietf-roll-p2p-measurement-05 and 
> * draft-ietf-roll-p2p-rpl-12
>  
> will end May 25th at noon ET, just a reminder.
>  
> Thanks.
>  
> JP.
>  
> On May 11, 2012, at 2:20 PM, JP Vasseur wrote:
> 
> 
> Dear all,
>  
> A first WG Last Call took place on March 16th on:
> * draft-ietf-roll-p2p-measurement-04 and 
> * draft-ietf-roll-p2p-rpl-09
>  
> Thanks to all of you for the fruitful and constructive comments received during WG Last call, that led 
> to several tickets that have been successfully closed, leading to new revisions of these documents.
>  
> This starts a new 2-week WG last call on:
> * draft-ietf-roll-p2p-measurement-05 and 
> * draft-ietf-roll-p2p-rpl-12
>  
> The WG Last call will end on May 25th at noon ET. Please send your comments on the mailing list and copy the authors.
>  
> Thanks.
>  
> JP and Michael.  
>  
>  
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> 
> From: Thomas Heide Clausen <ietf@thomasclausen.org>;
> Subject: Re: [Roll] RPL-P2P - status & update
> Date: April 13, 2012 11:21:00 PM GMT+02:00
> To: JP Vasseur <jpv@cisco.com>;
> Cc: "roll@ietf.org WG" <roll@ietf.org>;
>  
> Dear JP,
>  
> Sounds quite reasonable.
>  
> Have a pleasant weekend you too - I will be spending mine recovering from week-long meetings in the bay area...
>  
> Best,
>  
> Thomas
>  
> On Apr 13, 2012, at 14:16 , JP Vasseur wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi Thomas,
>  
> Clarifying a bit more … what I meant …
>  
> Plan is:
> * Close on the last open ticket
> * Authors will post a new revision of the document, possibly highlighting the changes
> * Issue another WG LC to make sure that the WG is comfortable with the new revision
>  
> Thanks, have a good week-end.
>  
> JP.
>  
> On Apr 13, 2012, at 9:03 PM, JP Vasseur wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi Thomas,
>  
> Absolutely, the plan was to run another incremental Last Call, on the new revision.
>  
> Cheers.
>  
> JP.
>  
> On Apr 13, 2012, at 8:25 PM, Thomas Heide Clausen wrote:
> 
> 
> Hello folks,
> 
> I've been trying to follow the many mails exchanged as a consequence of the WGLC of RPL-P2P.
> 
> Given the volume of changes to the document, I would like to ask that - once the authors estimate that a version of the I-D folding in all proposed changes is ready - the WG be given another 1-2 weeks WGLC before bouncing it off to the ADs?
> 
> This just to ensure that the WG gets to give the final version a good review before seeing it off.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Thomas
> 
> -- 
> Thomas Heide Clausen
> http://www.thomasclausen.org/
> 
> "Any simple problem can be made insoluble if enough meetings are held to
> discuss it."
>   -- Mitchell's Law of Committees
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>  
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>