Support
--
Paul Unbehagen


On Nov 29, 2012, at 3:38 PM, "LASSERRE, MARC (MARC)" 
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Support as is.
>  
> Marc
> 
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
> Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)
> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 6:53 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [nvo3] Consensus call and IPR check on 
> draft-rekhter-nvo3-vm-mobility-issues-03.txt
> 
> There have been a number of requests for the WG to adopt 
> draft-rekhter-nvo3-vm-mobility-issues-03.txt as 
>   a working group draft. There has also been some discussion on the list and 
> in 
>   Atlanta as to whether VM mobility requirements and problem statement issues 
>   should be addressed in a stand alone draft or as a part of the existing 
>   problem statement. There are also a number of other drafts addressing this 
>   issue, so if draft-rekhter is adopted as a stand alone working group 
> document, 
>   then that will provide the base working group document into which any 
>   additional text would be added.
> 
> In order to help 
>   the chairs determine how to progress on this issue, please can you indicate 
> to 
>   the list:
> 
> Do you 
>     support adoption of this draft as-is (yes/no)?
> If no, 
>     would you support adoption of this draft with changes, and if so, what 
> (e.g. 
>     more Layer 3 content)?
> If no, should all of the VM mobility problem statement be added to the NVO3 
> problem statement draft?
> 
> Coincidentally, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that applies to 
> this draft, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR 
> rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).
> If you are listed as a document author or contributor, please respond to this 
> email whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. The draft will not be 
> adopted until a response has been received from each author and contributor.
> If you are on the NVO3 WG email list but are not listed as an author or 
> contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR 
> that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.
> 
> This call for consensus will close on Thursday 13th December 2012.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Matthew and Benson
> _______________________________________________
> nvo3 mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3

_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3

Reply via email to