Subject: Re: [PWE3] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-pwe3-endpoint-fast-protection-01

From: "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 15:02:54 +0000

This email ends the WG Last Call for
draft-ietf-pwe3-endpoint-fast-protection-01. Thanks to every one who
reviewed and commented on the draft. Although it seems that there is
interest, the document also needs to be substantially revised,
particularly with respect to the clarity with which the proposed mechanism
is described.

Please could the authors work to resolve the comments on the list in a new
version of the draft. We will not progress the draft to another WG last
call until it has reached a greater level of maturity.

Best regards

Matthew

On 25/07/2014 15:56, "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)"
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>This email begins a second two week working group last call for
>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pwe3-endpoint-fast-protection-01 .
>
>Please review the draft and post any comments to the PWE3 list.
>
>If you have read the draft, even if you don¹t have any comments, but would
>like to see the draft progressed,  please can you indicate this to the
>list.
>
>This working group last call will end on Friday August 8th, 2014.
>
>
>Best regards
>
>
>Matthew and Andy
>
>_______________________________________________
>pwe3 mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3

---

From: Yimin Shen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 17:06:24 +0000

Thanks Matthew!

We will communicate with the reviewers and address all the comments in the next rev. 

Thanks,

/Yimin

-----Original Message-----
From: pwe3 [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2014 11:03 AM
To: Bocci, Matthew (Matthew); [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [PWE3] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-pwe3-endpoint-fast-protection-01

This email ends the WG Last Call for
draft-ietf-pwe3-endpoint-fast-protection-01. Thanks to every one who reviewed and commented on the draft. Although it seems that there is interest, the document also needs to be substantially revised, particularly with respect to the clarity with which the proposed mechanism is described.

Please could the authors work to resolve the comments on the list in a new version of the draft. We will not progress the draft to another WG last call until it has reached a greater level of maturity.

Best regards

Matthew

On 25/07/2014 15:56, "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)"
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>If you have read the draft, even if you don¹t have any comments, but 
>would like to see the draft progressed,  please can you indicate this 
>to the list.
>