Authors - Based on the discussion during the meeting in Dallas, please publish a new version of this with a slightly different name. We will not link the two in "replaces", and this will clear the existing IPR encumbrance.
Separately, will the cable Labs folks confirm that the new draft does not have any of your IPR in it? Once this is completed, we will call for WG adoption. Sorry for the Texas two-step, but this was the recommended way to address the IPR concerns. Thanks, Wes On 9/29/14, 12:04 PM, "Tom Taylor" <[email protected]> wrote: >Draft has been posted. Detailed changes as described in the response to >Lee Howard's review, plus deletion of the section on deterministic CGN >as agreed in Toronto. > >Tom Taylor > >-------- Original Message -------- >Subject: New Version Notification for >draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-05.txt >Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 08:55:31 -0700 >From: [email protected] >To: Tom Taylor <[email protected]>, Weibo Li ><[email protected]>, James Huang <[email protected]>, Gang Chen ><[email protected]>, Weibo Li <[email protected]>, Tina Tsou ><[email protected]>, Jing Huang <[email protected]>, >Tina Tsou <[email protected]>, Tom Taylor ><[email protected]>, Gang Chen <[email protected]> > > >A new version of I-D, draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-05.txt >has been successfully submitted by Tom Taylor and posted to the >IETF repository. > >Name: draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation >Revision: 05 >Title: Analysis of NAT64 Port Allocation Methods for Shared IPv4 >Addresses >Document date: 2014-09-29 >Group: Individual Submission >Pages: 19 >URL: >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation >-05.txt >Status: >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation/ >Htmlized: >http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-05 >Diff: >http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-chen-sunset4-cgn-port-allocation-05 > >Abstract: > This document enumerates methods of port assignment in Carrier Grade > NATs (CGNs), focused particularly on NAT64 environments. A > theoretical framework of different NAT port allocation methods is > described. The memo is intended to clarify and focus the port > allocation discussion and propose an integrated view of the > considerations for selection of the port allocation mechanism in a > given deployment. > > > > > >Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >submission >until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > >The IETF Secretariat > > > > >_______________________________________________ >sunset4 mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout. _______________________________________________ sunset4 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4
