[OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-06.txt

2017-05-15 Thread internet-drafts
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Operations and Management Area Working Group of the IETF. Title : Manufacturer Usage Description Specification Authors : Eliot Lear

Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-06.txt

2017-05-15 Thread Eliot Lear
Hi everyone, This version is intended to address comments made by various people during the previous WGLC. Several people have expressed an interest in providing further review. As such I do not propose that we forward this work along to the AD just yet. Eliot On 5/15/17 9:21 AM, internet-dra

[OPSAWG] LC request//RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-capwap-alt-tunnel-09.txt

2017-05-15 Thread Duzongpeng
Hi All, I am happy to join the I-D draft-ietf-opsawg-capwap-alt-tunnel, and help to improve the document based on the comments received and recorded in this page (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-capwap-alt-tunnel). I revised the document and responded to all the existing comm

Re: [OPSAWG] draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-06 Contributions, Status and Plans

2017-05-15 Thread Ignas Bagdonas
Hi Alan, On 13/05/2017 12:59, Alan DeKok wrote: The approach in the IETF is to have authors move towards WG consensus. i.e. to prove to to the WG that the draft is ready for publication. If you're not going to work towards WG consensus, I suggest the chairs replace you with authors who wil

Re: [OPSAWG] draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-06 Contributions, Status and Plans

2017-05-15 Thread t . petch
- Original Message - From: "Ignas Bagdonas" To: "Alan DeKok" Sent: Monday, May 15, 2017 5:00 PM > Hi Alan, > > On 13/05/2017 12:59, Alan DeKok wrote: > > The approach in the IETF is to have authors move towards WG consensus. > > i.e. to prove to to the WG that the draft is ready for publ

Re: [OPSAWG] draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-06 Contributions, Status and Plans

2017-05-15 Thread Douglas Gash (dcmgash)
The lack of interactivity was more our fault than any one else's, we took Alan¹s comments and incorporated them into the version we uploaded in Feb. What we should have done was collate Alan¹s comments to promote discussion. We¹re attempting to rectify than that now: 1) We put Alan¹s comments on

Re: [OPSAWG] draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-06 Contributions, Status and Plans

2017-05-15 Thread Tianran Zhou
Thanks Tom for pointing this out. We appreciate any review comment. That really helps to improve the document. I think it's back on the right track now. Hopefully, the authors can respond to more interactions. Regards, Tianran > -Original Message- > From: t.petch [mailto:ie...@btconnect

Re: [OPSAWG] LC request//RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-capwap-alt-tunnel-09.txt

2017-05-15 Thread Tianran Zhou
Hi Zongpeng, Thank you very much for picking this work up. The new version has a significant improvement on addressing existing comments. One more question that many people may be interested. Whether this I-D has been implemented or has plan to be implemented and deployed? Best, Tianran >