>>>>> On Sun, 15 May 2005 11:17:49 -0400, >>>>> Margaret Wasserman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> I've asked related questions about this comment on the wg list two >> times, including requested information at the Minneapolis meeting, but >> I've not got any responses...if this comment does not require any >> change to the document itself, I believe we are done. If it does, or >> if it requires any particular action (e.g., collecting implementation >> report), please clarify that. > It sounds like he document is ready, which is great, thanks! > It is up to the WG Chairs, Bob and Brian, to put together an > implementation report. In this particular case, this may only > involve pointing at the old implementation report and explaining why > the changes in this document do not warrant gathering further > implementation data. I will work with Bob and Brian on this. Cool, thanks. >> As I answered at this list, 2461bis and 2462bis should be updated at >> the same timing, so we'll eventually need to wait for 2461bis to be >> approved. If we reach the point, please just keep 2462bis sleeping >> for now. > Brian and Bob, what is the status on 2461bis? Are we expecting it to > be submitted for publication soon? 2461bis has passed the first wg last call. And, in my understanding, there were several non-trivial comments and we expect a new version addressing the comments before submitting the document to the IESG. As far as I can see, the comments were not so controversial, so I expect the next version will leave the wg. JINMEI, Tatuya Communication Platform Lab. Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------