Re: working group adoption poll for draft-mirsky-bfd-p2mp-vrrp-use-case

[Chris Bowers <[e-mail]>]

RTGWG,

This WG adoption poll ended last Friday.

One author and one non-author expressed support for adoption,
while no one expressed opposition to adoption. This adoption poll did
not produce any discussion or detailed feedback from anyone about the
draft itself.

I think there needs to be more technical discussion about the mechanism
proposed in this draft on the RTGWG list before consensus can be judged
either way.  I would encourage anyone interested in working on the
mechanism proposed in this draft to provide detailed feedback on the list.

Thanks,
Chris


On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:46 AM, Chris Bowers <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> RTGWG,
>
> The authors of draft-mirsky-bfd-p2mp-vrrp-use-case have requested
> that RTGWG adopt this draft as a WG document.
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mirsky-bfd-p2mp-vrrp-use-case/
>
> Please indicate whether or not you support adoption of the draft
> as a WG document.  An explanation of why or why not is also very helpful.
>
> The two authors have already indicated that they know of no relevant IPR
> other than what has already been disclosed. The draft has two IPR
> disclosures.
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3133/
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3135/
>
> For some history related to this draft, please see:
> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtgwg/current/msg06572.html
>
> For information about IPR in IETF technology, see RFC 8179.
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8179/
>
> Note that one of the basic principles regarding how the IETF deals with
> IPR claims (from RFC 8179)
> is that: "The IETF will make no determination about the validity of any
> particular IPR claim."
>
> Since Jeff Tantsura is a co-author, he will not be involved in judging
> consensus.
>
> The closing date for this poll is Friday, July 6th.
>
> Thanks,
> Chris
>
>
>
>
>