RE: RAQMON I-Ds Status

For the WG:

As a follow up, the authors/editors and I spend approx 2 hours during
IETF 64 going over my handscribbled comments/notes. They took a copy
of those and will do a revision based on that. So for now I have put
the documents in "Revised ID needed" in the I-D tracker.

Bert

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) 
> Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2005 17:33
> To: 'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'; 'Siddiqui, Anwar A (Anwar)';
> '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'
> Cc: RMON WG (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: RAQMON I-Ds Status
> 
> 
> On my plane-ride from NL to Vancouver I did review all 3
> RAQMON documents. I have hoped that I would have just
> minor comments and that I could request IETF Last Call.
> 
> However, I have found a lot of things that I want clarified
> - inconsistencies between the 3 documents
> - questions about "how one can implement from the specs and
>   assume to be interoperable"
> 
> So I wonder... who in the rmonmib WG has actually seriously 
> reviewed those documents? I must admit that I did not read
> the I-Ds in detail for a long time. But fro my AD-review I 
> did, and I now really wonder. I'll try to speak with the
> authors during this IETF week, and then I hope to find
> time to type-up my comments/concerns at the end of IETF64.
> 
> Futher I have lots of nitpicking that could be fixed.
> Since I suspect that we may need new revisions because of the
> above 2 major points, the nist may get fixed as well.
> 
> Bert
> 
>