I will try to get a new version out this week or next.
I plan to put in the algorithm text, although having discussed
this with Mike, our inclination is to include this as an
appendix since it is not required for interoperability that
you do the computation that way.
I will look at the issues left unresolved and any comments
posted in response to this email.
I see no reason to request a slot at IETF88 unless there remain
technical issues that we are unable to resolve on this list.
- Stewart (as duty editor of the draft)
On 01/10/2013 15:40, Alvaro Retana (aretana) wrote:
On 10/1/13 10:31 AM, "rogeriomariano" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Rogerio:
Folks, Does anyone know whether the draft deal will be treated in
the IETF 88?
We haven't started working on the agenda yet, so it is perhaps too
early to talk about whether this draft will be discussed in Vancouver
or not.
In the meant time, if you have comments or questions on the draft,
please post them to the list.
Thanks!
Alvaro.
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
--
For corporate legal information go to:
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
