Subject: [ippm] Second WGLC on draft-ippm-lmap-path was Re: Revised: draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-03

From: Brian Trammell <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 17:56:28 +0200

hi Al, all,

Thanks for the updated draft!

The changes appear to be extensive enough that a second WGLC is warranted; please provide any additional comments (or just a statement that you've read the new doc and it's OK) by Friday, June 13.

Thanks,

Brian (as chair)

On 29 May 2014, at 21:50, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Hi IPPM, and Lingli, Charles, and Dan in particular:
> 
> Thanks for providing comments on this draft during WGLC.
> A version which hopefully addresses all your comments is here:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-03
> 
> It should be fairly easy to find where your comments were 
> addressed, using the diff file:
> http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ippm-lmap-path-03.txt
> 
> Some changes are fairly extensive, to address Charles'
> request for rules for example. The co-authors had some fun with 
> that aspect.
> 
> I remember one specific question from Charles, "what is [SK]?"
> it's just a very tight reference to an informative white paper:
> 
>   [SK]       Crawford, Sam., "Test Methodology White Paper", SamKnows
>              Whitebox Briefing Note
>              http://www.samknows.com/broadband/index.php, July 2011.
> 
> regards,
> Al (for the co-authors)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ippm mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm