Thomas,
You are not mistaken. The WG chairs are responsible for
determining if there is consensus in the WG to advance a draft for
publication. If an issue was raised about the content of the document,
it should be discussed on the mailing list.Regards, Brian On 1/9/14 3:35 PM, Thomas C. Schmidt wrote: > Hi, > > I do not think that IETF procedures allow for WG chairs to garble drafts > after they had successfully passed WG last call. > > Am I mistaken, Brian? > > Cheers, > > Thomas > > On 09.01.2014 21:12, Behcet Sarikaya wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Before shepherding this document to IESG we would like to get consensus >> opinion on one issue regarding this document that came up recently. >> Please refer to my conversation with Thomas on the list. >> >> ISSUE: >> Multimob WG has not worked on PIM at MAG for receiver mobility, we only >> worked on Proxy at MAG as per RFC 6224. >> However draft-ietf-multimob-pmipv6-source-07 covers PIM at MAG for >> source mobility starting with Section 4.3. >> >> Question: >> >> Do you support covering PIM at MAG for source mobility, then say YES, >> >> if you do not support it then say NO. >> >> We need as many people as possible to express opinion on this issue. The >> deadline is one week from today, January 16, 2014. >> >> If WG consensus does not exist, we will ask the authors to remove PIM at >> MAG sections (subsections) and we will submit the revised document to >> IESG. >> >> Regards, >> >> Behcet >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> multimob mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob >> >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ multimob mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob
