Re: Jari Arkko's No Objection on draft-ietf-bmwg-bgp-basic-convergence-04: (with COMMENT)
Joel Halpern <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.bmwg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I still have not heard back about what appeared to me to be a small but signifciant technical error (the arithmetic in some of the cases seemed backwards). Whether that, or the rest, should be point-raised and on your shoulders, or a discuss, is between you and Jari. Yours, Joel > -----Original Message----- > From: joel jaeggli [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 10:51 AM > To: Jari Arkko; The IESG > Cc: Joel Halpern; [email protected]; > [email protected]; > [email protected]; > [email protected] > Subject: Re: Jari Arkko's No Objection on > draft-ietf-bmwg-bgp-basic-convergence-04: (with COMMENT) > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 12/4/14 5:42 AM, Jari Arkko wrote: > > Jari Arkko has entered the following ballot position for > > draft-ietf-bmwg-bgp-basic-convergence-04: No Objection > > > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and > reply to all > > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut > > this introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > > > Please refer to > > http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more > > information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found > > here: > > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bmwg-bgp-basic-convergence/ > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > COMMENT: > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Shouldn't the conclusions from the discussion after the Gen-ART > > review be incorporated to a new draft version? > > well if you have no major objections I thin this will fall > into approved point-raised because I think there is room to > address some of the outstanding comments. > > if you think I should hold it for that, I'll hold the discuss. > > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) > Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org > > iEYEARECAAYFAlSAgtEACgkQ8AA1q7Z/VrJF9ACgg4mV3kndFuYSicIn/moVC9O3 > GGgAn3TaIl3Z2oXK77nJFetwXE/ULJVf > =iE3r > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >