[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Consensus to move draft-caviglia-mp2cpcp2mp-03 to WG satus
Hi Diego and all.
1. I have already sent my comments to you. I will do it again if I have
some more about future revisions.
2. This is the easiest question. I would say this functionality is not
only useful but necessary!
3. I am OK for a WG status.
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On
Behalf Of Diego Caviglia
during the last IETF meeting unfortunaltely there was not
enough thime to present and discuss the ID in the subject, nevertheless
I think (but I'm an authour) the ID satisfy a real request from the
I'd like to ask you some questions
1. Are there any comments on the ID?
2. Mainly for the carriers. Do you think the ID describes an
3. Should the ID moved to the WG status?
Of course my answer for 2 and 3 are Yes and Yes ;-)