Subject: [Idr] prefix limit

From: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 10:35:47 -0700

Folks,

For the purpose of determining the WG consensus on the attached I
assume that (a) everyone who replies "yes" to either (2) or (3) is
also in favor of taking signalling prefix limit as a WG item, and
(b) co-authors of each proposal are in favor of accepting that
proposal as a WG item (unless they explicitly state otherwise).

Yakov.

P.S. One could say that the above is obvious, but the reason I am
stating the above is to avoid any misunderstanding.
------- Forwarded Message

Date:    Tue, 11 May 2004 19:35:54 -0700
From:    Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
To:      [email-masked]
Subject: [Idr] draft-chavali-bgp-prefixlimit-02.txt as an IDR WG document

Folks,

Given the current discussion on the mailing list, the deadline
for comments on accepting draft-chavali-bgp-prefixlimit-02.txt
as an IDR WG document is extended to May 24, 2004.

This way May 24 is the deadline for comments on the following:

1. whether to take signalled prefix limit as a WG item

2. whether to accept draft-chavali-bgp-prefixlimit-02.txt as an IDR
   WG document

3. whether to accept draft-keyur-prefixlimit-orf-00.txt as an IDR
   WG document

In your e-mails please clearly indicate your preferences. Providing
rationale for your preferences would be extremely useful as well.

Yakov.

P.S If folks feel that the deadline should be extended beyond
May 24, please say so.

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

------- End of Forwarded Message

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