> On 29. Dec 2022, at 12:18, Henk Birkholz <henk.birkh...@sit.fraunhofer.de> > wrote: > > Hi Tom, > Hi Michael, > hi all, > > thanks for your help! > > As I am continuously challenged by reading my own calendar properly, replies > for this Working Group Call for Adoption may drizzle in until Monday (and > then some, as I am not sure how many folks will look at this on Jan 1st). In > essence, we can relax the deadline a bit as there are probably more important > things to plan for this weekend! > > Also, Michael is correct. This is just about adoption: > > OLD: > Since the last WGLC > > NEW: > Since the last WGAC (Working Group Call for Adoption) Thanks a lot for the clarification. > > > A Happy New year to all of you! Happy New Year for you.
Best regards Michael > > Henk > > > On 28.12.22 19:46, Michael Tuexen wrote: >>> On 8. Dec 2022, at 21:34, Henk Birkholz <henk.birkh...@sit.fraunhofer.de> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Dear OPSAWG members, >>> >>> this starts a Working Group Adoption call for a bundle of two documents: >>> >>>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcapng-05.html >>>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-richardson-opsawg-pcaplinktype-01.html >>> >>> ending on Monday, December 30th. >>> >>> As a recap: we already went through a first WGLC for >>> draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcapng-03 and this is the second WGLC. The last WGLC >>> did not yield a critical mass of active support. >> Hi Henk, >> just a clarification question: >> you are referring to a WGLC in the past. As far as I know, the document has >> not been >> accepted as a WG document. That is why it still has draft-tuexen in its name. >> Are you referring to an adoption call instead of WGLC? >> Best regards >> Michael >>> >>> Since the last WGLC, two relevant decisions were made: >>> >>> 1.) The Intended Status of the main document draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcapng is >>> now Informational. >>> >>> 2.) The draft-richardson-opsawg-pcaplinktype document was split from the >>> main documents, focuses solely on the PCAP LINK Type registry content, and >>> retains the Intended Status Standards Track (as informational documents >>> cannot request a registry). >>> >>> As a generic reminder, these internet drafts describe the PCAPng format and >>> its corresponding registry - retaining the established design patterns of >>> PCAP and adding new capabilities as well as a an extensibility feature. >>> Please note that the corresponding document >>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-opsawg-pcap-01.html was adopted >>> in October 2021 and its Intended Status is Historical. >>> >>> Please reply with your active support (+1 required) or objections and >>> especially any substantive comments you may have. >>> >>> For the OPSAWG co-chairs, >>> >>> Henk >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OPSAWG mailing list >>> OPSAWG@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
