Subject: [AVT] Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-avt-hc-over-mpls-protocol (Protocol Extensions for Header Compression over MPLS) to Proposed Standard

From: "Andrew G. Malis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 16:05:45 -0500

As one of the co-authors, I just wanted to point out that the 
downreference mentioned below really isn't necessary in the normative 
text, as RFC 3985 was already referenced (twice!) in the informative 
introductory text, and thus can easily be removed from the normative 
text. The only reason we included the reference in the normative 
section is that RFC 3985 is a good resource for people who really 
aren't familiar with the relationship between pseudowires and the 
MPLS tunnels that carry them. As far as I'm concerned, the reference 
can be removed if it is a problem.

Thanks,
Andy

-----------

At 2/5/2007 10:36 AM -0500, The IESG wrote:
>The IESG has received a request from the Audio/Video Transport WG (avt)
>to consider the following document:
>
>- 'Protocol Extensions for Header Compression over MPLS '
>    <draft-ietf-avt-hc-over-mpls-protocol-07.txt> as a Proposed Standard
>
>The original Last Call failed to note that there is a normative
>downreference in the document to RFC 3985, which is an Informational RFC.
>
>The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
>final comments on this action.  Please send substantive comments to the
>[email-masked] mailing lists by 2007-02-19. Exceptionally,
>comments may be sent to [email-masked] instead. In either case, please
>retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>
>The file can be obtained via
>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-avt-hc-over-mpls-protocol-07.txt
>
>
>IESG discussion can be tracked via
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=13573&rfc_flag=0

_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt