On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 3:12 AM, Jen Linkova <[email protected]> wrote:
> I've read the draft. I think it's a very useful document. All my comments > I provided to the authors after the IETF123 have been addressed. > I believe the document is ready for the next step. > Yay! > I recall some discussion in Madrid about the intended status: Std vs > Informational. IMHO this document belongs to the standard track, because > section 4 specifies the desired router behaviour. > Thank you, you are correct, that was the consensus in the room, and, I believe, from the chairs. It *is* noted as Standards Track in both the editor's copy, and in the posted copy - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-intarea-v4-via-v6/ [0] W [0]: I am mentioning this because you almost gave me a heart attack — I figured we might have forgotten to post the new version! > On Sat, Sep 13, 2025 at 4:51 AM Wassim Haddad > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Intarea WG, > > This email triggers a WGLC for the “IPv4 routes with an IPv6 next hop” > draft. This document went through multiple revisions, and the chairs and > authors believe it is now ready for WGLC. > > Please (re)-review the draft and send your comments and feedback to > Intarea ML. > > Please note this is a 2-week WGLC ending on 09/26/2025 at 23:59:59 UTC. > > Thanks much and have a great WE! > > Regards, > > Juan Carlos & Wassim > > Internet Area WG Chairs > > _______________________________________________ > Int-area mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > > -- > Cheers, Jen Linkova > > _______________________________________________ > Int-area mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
