Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpsocket-26 started
"James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com> Tue, 08 February 2011 04:04 UTC
Return-Path: <jmpolk@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85F0F3A6C04 for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Feb 2011 20:04:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.089, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jcQYzNR0kaT2 for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Feb 2011 20:04:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D3D03A6ACE for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Feb 2011 20:04:46 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AssFAFlPUE2rR7H+/2dsb2JhbACXDI4cc6A3myCFWgSEeg
Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com ([171.71.177.254]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Feb 2011 04:04:52 +0000
Received: from jmpolk-wxp01.cisco.com (rcdn-jmpolk-8716.cisco.com [10.99.80.23]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p1844pFu020062; Tue, 8 Feb 2011 04:04:52 GMT
Message-Id: <201102080404.p1844pFu020062@sj-core-2.cisco.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2011 22:04:50 -0600
To: bidulock@openss7.org
From: "James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpsocket-26 started
In-Reply-To: <20110208035154.GA13501@openss7.org>
References: <201102080311.p183BoXh025565@sj-core-5.cisco.com> <20110208035154.GA13501@openss7.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Cc: tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tsvwg>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 04:04:47 -0000
At 09:51 PM 2/7/2011, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote: >James, > >The intended status of the document is INFORMATIONAL not PS. %*(&^%^%, *$%*&%.... and %^*&%*&^ grrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!! I messed up obviously. That ought to teach me *not* to cut and paste (from the stream reset WGLC) without verifying. grrrrrrrrrrrr!! I apologize for the boneheaded mistake. I own it. This doc is INFORMATIONAL. err, thanks Brian for pointing this out so quickly. James with my chair hat on (covering my face in embarrassment!) >Was that just a typo? > >If not, my first comment is that any RFC issued for C-language >APIs must be INFORMATIONAL and not PS. > >--brian > >James M. Polk wrote: (Mon, 07 Feb 2011 21:10:53) > > TSVWG > > > > I am starting the WGLC for > > > > "Sockets API Extensions for Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP)" > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpsocket/ > > > > this is a 2 week WGLC, ending February 22nd, 2011 or when the chairs > > feel the WG has reviewed the draft and reached consensus to progress > > towards the ADs with the goal of becoming a proposed standard (PS) RFC. > > > > The chairs require substantive feedback from the WG regarding this draft > > before consensus can be called. > > > > I will be the document shepherd. > > > > James > > TSVWG chair > > > >-- >Brian F. G. Bidulock >bidulock@openss7.org >http://www.openss7.org/
- WGLC for draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpsocket-26 started James M. Polk
- Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpsocket-26 start… Brian F. G. Bidulock
- Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpsocket-26 start… James M. Polk
- Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpsocket-26 start… Thomas Dreibholz
- Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpsocket-26 start… Irene Rüngeler
- Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpsocket-26 start… Michael Welzl
- Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpsocket-26 start… Becke, Martin
- Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpsocket-26 start… Michael Tüxen
- Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpsocket-26 start… Robin Seggelmann
- Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpsocket-26 start… Jon Leighton