Re: new WG item? draft-nmcgill-l2tpext-circuit-status-extensions

Hi all,
There has been absolutely no answer from anyone.
I would like to have at least one person respond.
-Ignacio


At 11:49 AM 8/5/2008 -0700, Ignacio Goyret wrote:
>Hi all,
>The authors of this draft have asked the WG to consider adopting it
>as a WG work item.
>
>The draft can be viewed here: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nmcgill-l2tpext-circuit-status-extensions-01
>
>
>The draft defines new bits (and deprecates the usage of the "New-bit")
>for the Circuit Status AVP. The newly defined bits provide more granular
>active/inactive signaling.
>
>An RFC is needed to assign these bits in IANA (IETF Consensus policy),
>thus the request to adopt the draft.
>
>Group, I need to hear from other people besides me and the authors.
>A short "accept" or "deny" email is sufficient. You can send your vote
>on accepting this draft as a WG work item to the list or to me directly.
>
>Send your response before Monday, August/11.
>
>Note that an "accept" vote does NOT mean that the draft will be
>published as is. Like any other draft, it will go through the usual
>period of comments and reviews, WGLC, LC, etc. etc.
>
>Thanks,
>-Ignacio
>
>_______________________________________________
>L2tpext mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2tpext