Message-Id: <3A807B31-473A-45BD-ABDC-BEB0CFF954F7@windriver.com>
From: David Borman <david.borman@windriver.com>
To: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <49119B68.4040607@ericsson.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2)
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 12:19:49 -0600
References: <B5A5E01F9387F4409E67604C0257C71E706737@NDJSEVS25A.ndc.nasa.gov>
 <49119B68.4040607@ericsson.com>
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org, "Eddy,
 Wesley M. \(GRC-RCN0\)\[VZ\]" <Wesley.M.Eddy@nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] intended status of UTO
Precedence: list
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes"
Sender: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org

Ok, I'll clarify it.  The UTO document went through WGLC without  =

changing it to experimental, so it is standards track.  Wes' message  =

explicitly brought up this point, so that people could object if they  =

felt that wasn't true.  So far, no one has objected, so it is still  =

standards track.  As Magnus notes, any late-comers that want to object  =

will now have to do this during the IETF last call.

			-David Borman, TCPM WG co-chair

On Nov 5, 2008, at 7:11 AM, Magnus Westerlund wrote:

> Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-RCN0)[VZ] skrev:
>> Although UTO has finished last-call and been submitted
>> for publication, Magnus has noted that there seemed to
>> be a question during last call about its intended status
>> that wasn't conclusively resolved.
>>
>> Our ADs would like to make sure that there isn't going
>> to be a problem with publishing this as proposed standard,
>> and need the WG's feedback in order to advance the document.
>>
>> By my homework, the charter item for UTO was written for
>> a proposed standard.  When I checked the archives, it
>> looked like Pasi was the only WGLC commenter that argued
>> for experimental, and on the other hand, Joe, Mark,
>> Caitlin, and Toby all seemed to support it as proposed
>> standard.  Versions 04 through 09 of the draft include
>> "Intended status: Standards Track".
>>
>> However, in the IETF 68 minutes, I found this:
>> * Lars and chairs did not remember if this is going for experimental
>> or
>>   proposed. Tim Shepard has preference for experimental.
>>   - Tim Shepherd: in San Diego asked this explicitly from chairs
>> during
>>     agenda bashing, they said the plan is for Experimental.
>>   - Lars: ok
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> I had hoped the WG chairs would simply declare that standards track  =

> was
> the consensus of the WG last call. To me it is quite clear that this  =

> is
> the case. The old IETF 68 minutes are far prior to the WG last call.
> Thus I will declare that UTO will be IETF last called intended for
> Standards Track. If anyone object about this they can send in a IETF
> last call comment on this.
>
> Cheers
>
> Magnus Westerlund
>
> IETF Transport Area Director & TSVWG Chair
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ericsson AB                | Phone +46 8 4048287
> F=E4r=F6gatan 6                | Fax   +46 8 7575550
> S-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> tcpm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm

_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
tcpm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm