Hi Ralph, Based on this e-mail, I think we should close issue #16: DHCP route option does not belong in mif WG. It is not in scope for the mif WG to discuss whether our chartered work items belong in our group.
Thoughts? Margaret On Nov 9, 2012, at 2:15 AM, Ralph Droms wrote: > I've been following the recent discussion of > draft-ietf-mif-dhcpv6-route-option, including the issue of whether this work > belongs in mif. As item 2 in the list of explicit WG deliverables defines > the problem addressed in draft-ietf-mif-dhcpv6-route-option, and that > document has been accepted as a mif WG work item, it's appropriate for the > mif WG to continue development of the document. > > - Ralph > > _______________________________________________ > mif mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif _______________________________________________ mif mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif
