IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] RPL-P2P - status & update

JP Vasseur <jpv@cisco.com> Fri, 13 April 2012 21:18 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 D7D8B21F864F for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 14:18:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.237
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.237 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.361, 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 hL2o6Z6Kk5kf for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 14:18:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C09AD21F864E for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 14:18:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=jpv@cisco.com; l=4429; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1334351904; x=1335561504; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id: references:to; bh=ChFeKT2nQ9L50AuuEcFzuKCwcJ54hWY6dQTw7yh2Lg0=; b=kLljqBbLq9eY7w3ikKZxrquZDUBV+NuoPRXa1rkth1iReo9ygZ7DpzPq wSfr+DII3hmTTrL05BK2l/IOhI7lerwNKyZAxGC3/G2yF3s3N6EXoelZB v1MDJZwKNGasbcLSVlcb3e+hMrTC+9PuO3FQZNEwHkDjwCj+A5n6pwwbd o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AokGAAWXiE+Q/khR/2dsb2JhbABFgxyxe4EHggkBAQEDAQEBAQ8BWwsFCwsEFC4nMAYTCRmHZwULmUOfeZBmYwSVbIVyiFuBaYJp
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.75,419,1330905600"; d="scan'208,217"; a="135131569"
Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com ([144.254.72.81]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Apr 2012 21:18:23 +0000
Received: from xbh-ams-201.cisco.com (xbh-ams-201.cisco.com [144.254.75.7]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q3DLINMw008852; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 21:18:23 GMT
Received: from xfe-ams-202.cisco.com ([144.254.231.96]) by xbh-ams-201.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 13 Apr 2012 23:18:23 +0200
Received: from [10.60.114.227] ([10.60.114.227]) by xfe-ams-202.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 13 Apr 2012 23:18:23 +0200
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_12A7070D-8142-4030-AA87-3E22250A8C9A"
From: JP Vasseur <jpv@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D3289261-90AF-47F9-B24D-9F10039FBF91@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 23:16:54 +0200
Message-Id: <EFAE0A16-D123-4538-B15A-0F2A96E67458@cisco.com>
References: <CB3B8188-6E42-4996-BE18-D22220DFC172@thomasclausen.org> <D3289261-90AF-47F9-B24D-9F10039FBF91@cisco.com>
To: Thomas Heide Clausen <ietf@thomasclausen.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Apr 2012 21:18:23.0323 (UTC) FILETIME=[F54602B0:01CD19BA]
Cc: "roll@ietf.org WG" <roll@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Roll] RPL-P2P - status & update
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: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 21:18:26 -0000

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email