Subject: [MEXT] WGLC for draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09

From: marcelo bagnulo braun <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 09:49:00 +0200

This note issues the WGLC for draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09.

Please send your comments before the 1st of august.

You can find the draft at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-09

Regards, marcelo

---

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:29:03 -0700 (PDT)

I support advancing this document.

Regards,

Behcet

> _______________________________________________
> MEXT mailing  list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>

---

From: marcelo bagnulo braun <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 18:12:29 +0200

That is nice, but it would be much more useful a thorough review of the 
document and comments in the ml of how it can improved.

Regards, marcelo

---

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 09:20:30 -0700 (PDT)

Marcelo, this draft has been reviewed in depth so many times and the current 
version is in a very good shape.

Take my word for it because I am one of the authors :-).

Regards,

Behcet

---

From: marcelo bagnulo braun <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 18:28:04 +0200

So, let me rephrase then, support from the authors is nice, but it would 
be much more useful to have through reviews of the document.

Regards, marcelo

---

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 11:33:38 -0700 (PDT)

> be  much more useful to have through reviews of the document.

Did we have a chair's review?

Just asking.

behcet

---

From: marcelo bagnulo braun <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 20:59:01 +0200

The document will be reviewed by the document shepherd as defined by the 
process, before shipping it to the iesg, as any other mext document.

---

From: Sri Gundavelli <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 11:48:54 -0700

This doc is generally in a good shape. Went through quite a few reviews over
the last few years.

Sure, this is a comment from an additional author review. But, there are
like a dozen or two co-authors on this ...

Sri

---

From: Ryuji Wakikawa <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 15:43:42 -0700

Hi Marcelo

I'll support this document as an author;)
I expect more reviews on this doc.

For some records, we had review from Carlos, Arnaud, Basavaraj a year ago.

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext/current/msg04251.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext/current/msg04250.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext/current/msg04277.html

I also noticed I got a comment from Dirk, Thanks Dirk and sorry for
missing your email.
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext/current/msg04668.html
The comments are mostly editorial. I'll update this once WGLC is close

thanks
ryuji

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:28 AM, marcelo bagnulo braun
<[email-masked]> wrote:
> So, let me rephrase then, support from the authors is nice, but it would be
> much more useful to have through reviews of the document.
>
> Regards, marcelo
>
>

---

From: Hidetoshi Yokota <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 20:31:24 +0900

Hi Marcelo and all,

This document has been long discussed and is stable enough now. I have
no significant comment on it and support to move forward.

Only very very minor editorial comment:

In Section 4.7,

s/Count IPv6 IPv6 Addr/Count IPv6 Addr/

Regards,
-- 
Hidetoshi