Subject: [dhcwg] stalled (?) dhc WG documents

From: Thomas Narten <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 10:23:41 -0500

The following documents have been submitted to the IESG, but are
awaiting revised IDs (per IESG comments sent a while back).

draft-ietf-dhc-concat-01.txt (Comments sent Feb 1, 2002)
draft-ietf-dhc-csr-05.txt (Comment sent Feb 1, 2002)
draft-ietf-dhc-agent-subnet-selection-00.txt (discussed in Minneapolis
					     -- what was the
					     resolution and next steps?)

What can I do to help move these documents along?
					     
Thomas

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

---

From: Kim Kinnear <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 11:15:47 -0500

>                                             resolution and next steps?)

        I was going to revise it based on the comments in MN and
        based on whatever you told me was feedback from the IESG
        as far as IETF last call (a title change at least to add
        IPv4, as well as other comments I haven't yet received from
        you).

        As the comments in MN only touched on a relatively minor
        part of the draft (sending the sub-option back to the
        client if you used it), then I was assuming that we
        didn't need to go through WG last call again, but I'm
        open to suggestion on that.

        So, I see the following possible approaches:

          a) I revise the draft based on IESG comments and MN
          comments and we are done (based of course on the IESG
          comments and some final review of the result).

          b) I revise the draft based on MN comments and resubmit
          it, and then it goes again to IETF last call.

          c) I review the draft based on MN comments and it
          starts over again at WG last call.

        Thomas, Ralph, what do you prefer?

        I'd prefer (a), but (b) isn't bad.  I don't like (c), but
        I'll do whatever you want.

        Cheers -- Kim

---

From: Thomas Narten <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 13:41:22 -0500

>         IPv4, as well as other comments I haven't yet received from

I think I've sent you all the comments I have. But if you point me to
a copy of the revised ID before you send it in I will double check.

>           comments and some final review of the result).

This seems fine to me, though I think "some final review of the
result" could in practice be a one-week WG last call. Especially if a
few folks quickly chime in and say "I've read the new text and its
good".

Thomas