Re: Re: [dhcwg] WG Last Call for DHCP draft

Ted Lemon wrote:

> On Jan 26, 2005, at 5:25 PM, Vivek Kashyap wrote:
>
>> No it does not obsolete it..the RFC header states that it obsoletes 
>> 1533.
>> there is no mention of 1542.
>
>
> D'oh!   I knew those numbers looked funny.   I'm sorry about that - I 
> didn't bother to go make sure I was using the right RFC number, so I 
> thought you were talking about 1533 when you were talking about 
> 1542.   :'(   So yeah, that text is just fine as is.
>
>> I'll add some text that should hopefully close this.
>
>
> Great, thanks!
>
>
>
Ok - WG Chair summary of these two issues

1) First issue - mistaken RFC - no problem
2) Second issue - clarify text to say these are possible values, 
proposed text change will be published to both WG and closed - new ID 
will be issued to close issue

Bill
co-chair IPoIB WG