Subject: [Rmt] any outstanding issue with draft-ietf-rmt-fec-bb-revised-03 ?

From: Lorenzo Vicisano <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 18:32:18 +0000

the previus version of this went through WG last-call, then the
following happened:

  - discussion on the requirements to instantiate new FEC IDs -> due
    to lack of consensus I proposed to maintain the current
    requirement (IETF Consensus)

  - Minor updates where needed following the Vancouver IETF meeting
    (these are included in -03, I believe).

does anybody see any reason to hold this back ?

If I don't hear anything by 2/27 I'll ask Allison to submit this to the
IESG.

	thanks,
	Lorenzo

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

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 10:32:20 +0200

Hi Lorenzo, Mark, All

Do you think the number of authors on LCT revised will be an issue in
IESG or RFC Editor stages? (There are 7 and the general guidance is up
to 5).

Partly because of the wide ranging contributions and partly because of
the editorial issues of our building block and two stage RFC process,
it's probably guaranteed that RMT documents need more authors than the
average RFC. I think keeping a proper author list is the right approach
rather than enforcing a 5 limit which probably did not take into account
the methodology used in RMT. So IMHO the LCT author list is good as is.
<Though a contributors list is also needed for the lesser
contributions>.

It's worth at least seeing of Allison and Jon have an opinion.

Cheers, Rod.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On 
>Behalf Of ext Lorenzo Vicisano
>Sent: 17 February, 2006 20:32
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: [Rmt] any outstanding issue with 
>draft-ietf-rmt-fec-bb-revised-03 ?
>
>the previus version of this went through WG last-call, then 
>the following happened:
>
>If I don't hear anything by 2/27 I'll ask Allison to submit 
>this to the IESG.
>
>	thanks,
>	Lorenzo
>

---

From: Lorenzo Vicisano <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 16:39:59 +0000

Rod,

I suspect that it is fine to go ahead with the current number of
authors, but I'll let Allison comment..

	Lorenzo