Re: [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-domain-subobjects-01

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Fri, 26 June 2015 15:55 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 152A21A8873 for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 08:55:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.667
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.667 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4PJIcT4tRPSb for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 08:55:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gproxy9-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy9-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [69.89.20.122]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DE3D81A8871 for <teas@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 08:55:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 32242 invoked by uid 0); 26 Jun 2015 15:55:05 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cmgw4) (10.0.90.85) by gproxy9.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 26 Jun 2015 15:55:05 -0000
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by cmgw4 with id l9nr1q00W2SSUrH019nuDt; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 15:47:54 -0600
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=HpvlRSjS c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:117 a=wU2YTnxGAAAA:8 a=cNaOj0WVAAAA:8 a=AGkejYDSTmIA:10 a=N659UExz7-8A:10 a=-NfooI8aBGcA:10 a=uEJ9t1CZtbIA:10 a=XAFQembCKUMA:10 a=i0EeH86SAAAA:8 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=gOKZqEL5tNwmb5pV6T4A:9 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:CC:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=1/DXEaHYxO1isFBAqBrVrFSjdK/vPZ3KgF9StzQkDzg=; b=DTSLuFSZpg5T16DegEsqFCK6VF2NLS9DE0rxgDs5e+U8x1rCsh2/wMCBxNfIUiJcdwL4CDNnj9gU1qK5zDliEwXp6AGIT9N5YPrsR+FcL2s8fXKGryYr4KTAvjxLHUIM;
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]:58886 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1Z8Vy2-0005W0-D6; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 09:55:02 -0600
Message-ID: <558D75CF.4010606@labn.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 11:54:55 -0400
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "teas@ietf.org" <teas@ietf.org>
References: <23CE718903A838468A8B325B80962F9B870E4181@BLREML509-MBX.china.huawei.com> <10376B02BC561F4185654159EF7900204593D81B@szxeml561-mbx.china.huawei.com> <CA+YzgTsigLHvY_31bhEMNz_iaQLzUWe1mHLPQ4Bn7S+rvtMbkw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+YzgTsigLHvY_31bhEMNz_iaQLzUWe1mHLPQ4Bn7S+rvtMbkw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Identified-User: {1038:box313.bluehost.com:labnmobi:labn.net} {sentby:smtp auth 69.89.31.113 authed with lberger@labn.net}
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/TV3X9BVc9mGW4lXWr-C0-sziCQE>
Cc: Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-domain-subobjects-01
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <teas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/teas/>
List-Post: <mailto:teas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 15:55:07 -0000

All,

Given the lack of discussion, I propose that the definition should be
left as is.  We can always revisit if/when usage warrants moving to
Standards track. 

In other words, speak up now if you want anything different.

Thanks,
Lou


On 6/16/2015 4:22 PM, Vishnu Pavan Beeram wrote:
> The WG last call is now closed for this document.
>
> There was a question raised (Adrian) on this thread, for which it
> would be useful to get some consensus on -
> - Should the definition of the 4-octet AS sub-object be moved to
> standards track?
>
> @WG -- Please chime in.
>
> Thanks,
> -Pavan and Lou.
>
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 2:05 AM, Venugopal Reddy K
> <venugopalreddyk@huawei.com <mailto:venugopalreddyk@huawei.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>      
>
>     I've reviewed this document and believe it is ready for publication. 
>
>      
>
>     Regards,
>
>     Venu(co-author)
>
>      
>
>      
>
>     *From:*Teas [mailto:teas-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Vishnu
>     Pavan Beeram
>     *Sent:* 20 May 2015 02:50
>     *To:* teas@ietf.org <mailto:teas@ietf.org>
>     *Subject:* [Teas] WG Last Call on
>     draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-domain-subobjects-01
>
>      
>
>     All,
>
>     This starts a two week working group last call on
>     draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-domain-subobjects-01.
>
>     This working group last call ends on Tuesday, June 2nd. Please
>     send your comments to the TEAS mailing list.
>
>     Note, IPR has been disclosed on this draft. All the IPR
>     declarations from authors and contributors have been collected and
>     can be found in the history of the document:
>     https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-domain-subobjects/history/
>
>      
>
>     Pavan and Lou.
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Teas mailing list
>     Teas@ietf.org <mailto:Teas@ietf.org>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Teas mailing list
> Teas@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas