Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-main-ipaddr-text-rep-01.txt

From: Zefram <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 17:33:40 +0100

[email-masked] wrote:
>	Title		: Textual Representation of IPv4 and IPv6 Addresses
>	Author(s)	: A. Main
>	Filename	: draft-main-ipaddr-text-rep-01.txt
>	Pages		: 12
>	Date		: 2003-10-23
...
>A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-main-ipaddr-text-rep-01.txt

I've not been able to work on this for most of the last six months due
to personal problems, but I've finally got round to handling the comments
from the first draft and I'm in full working order again.

It was pointed out that this ought to be standards-track, and I've
labelled this draft accordingly.  Does this need to be adopted as a WG
draft in order to be published on the standards track?  I'm not clear
on the procedure here.  If there's any non-trivial decision to be made
about the relation between the WG and this draft then it could probably
be decided quickly in Minneapolis.  (I won't be in Minneapolis, btw --
I'm not going to the US under the present regime.)

-zefram
-- 
Andrew Main (Zefram) <[email-masked]>

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 18:07:50 +0100

Formally, no, this could be processed as an independent submission.
But I think review by this WG is desirable anyway. Could the chairs
give it 5 minutes on the agenda? Having written the original faulty
ABNF, I feel some responsibility here... 

   Brian