Hi Folks,
We have published a new version of the DSL line identification draft
that addresses the comments received at the last IETF meeting.
* It includes a network reference diagram
* It adds text describing the Broadband Forum TR-101 model and adds a
reference to the model
* It adds
Ok, Lars, you're asking for opinions, I will give you one. Remember,
you asked.
I think that, given how many times the IETF has added bizzare
standards track features to IPv6 in order to keep the 3G crew happy,
it is very strange to me that we should now balk at approving an
Informational
The concerns I had were resolved in the -10 version (and later). I support the
publishing of this work as an Informational RFC with the objective of
encouraging support for interoperable implementations. We will start working
the v4 to v6 transition in the community as soon as it becomes
All,
The following document has been submitted to the IESG as
publication as an Informational RFC. In order to solicit as wide a
review as possible, we are holding a 2-week working group last call on
advancing:
Title : Common Architecture Label IPv6 Security Option (CALIPSO)
On Mar 11, 2009, at 9:15 AM, Rob Austein wrote:
I think the IETF should get out of the way and let the MLS people have
their hop-by-hop option and Informational document.
+1
Regards,
-drc
IETF IPv6 working group mailing
On Wednesday 11 March 2009 04:13:31 pm Brian Haberman wrote:
All,
The following document has been submitted to the IESG as
publication as an Informational RFC. In order to solicit as wide a
review as possible, we are holding a 2-week working group last call on
advancing:
Title
I am editor and shepherd for this draft.
I support publishing this as an Informational RFC.
Publishing this document is important to enable the
MLS deployment world (on multiple continents and in
multiple countries) to transition from IPv4 to IPv6.
Yours,
Ran Atkinson
