Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] [OPS-AREA] draft-ietf-opsawg-management-stds-04 - is there consensus?

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 14:40:15 +0100

On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 03:45:37PM -0800, Christopher LILJENSTOLPE wrote:
> Greetings,
> 
> 	We've WGLC'd this document twice, and each time we've gotten submissions and suggestions.  The authors have updated the text based on the last WGLC responses.  As most of the response has been fairly positive, we would like to move this version of the document to the IESG for approval.  If anyone has serious objections - please raise them on the list within 72 hours from now (say midnight Friday, 10 Feb, UTC).  Silence is acceptance :)
> 

I looked through the diffs and they seem to be fine. Before this
document goes to the IESG, we should perhaps clear the open issues
listed in Appendix C:

   o  What is the status of draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview?  It expired
      on November 2011.

   o  Decide what to do with following references:

   o  What is the status of draft-ietf-ipfix-export-per-sctp-stream-08?
      (RFC Ed Queue for 569 days, depends on
      draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-strrst-13.txt awaiting author action)

   o  What is the status of draft-ietf-ipfix-configuration-model-10?
      (RFC Ed Queue for 198 days, depends on draft-ietf-ipfix-psamp-mib
      awaiting AD-Go-Ahead::External Party)

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>

---

From: "Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 14:56:13 +0100

Hi Juergen,

thank you for the positive feedback.

Concerning draft-ietf-ipfix-export-per-sctp-stream and
draft-ietf-ipfix-configuration-model, I asked already our AD
with an email after the submission of our draft. They seem 
to be underway and will be available at the latest during the 
publication of draft-ietf-opsawg-management-stds as 
Informational RFC. RFC Editor can then replace the I-D 
reference with the corresponding RFC reference.

Concerning draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview I had to delete the 
corresponding text, as it expired already in November 2011 and
I did not get any answer to my earlier mail to the authors.
I assume it is not going to be finalized soon. 

May be OPSAWG chairs know more than I do and can say a few 
clarifying words. 

Cheers, 
Mehmet 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
Behalf Of
> ext Juergen Schoenwaelder
> Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 2:40 PM
> To: Christopher LILJENSTOLPE
> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [OPS-AREA] draft-ietf-opsawg-management-stds-04 - is
there
> consensus?
> > 	We've WGLC'd this document twice, and each time we've gotten
submissions
> and suggestions.  The authors have updated the text based on the last
WGLC
> responses.  As most of the response has been fairly positive, we would
like to move
> this version of the document to the IESG for approval.  If anyone has
serious
> objections - please raise them on the list within 72 hours from now
(say midnight
> Friday, 10 Feb, UTC).  Silence is acceptance :)
> >
> 
>    o  What is the status of
draft-ietf-ipfix-export-per-sctp-stream-08?
> _______________________________________________
> OPS-AREA mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-area