RE: Status of draft-ietf-ccamp-sdhsonet-control-02.txt

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

If you go to the I-D tracker web pages:

   https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi

and you fill in your document name (without the revision,
i.e. just draft-ietf-ccamp-sdhsonet-control) and press the
SEARCH button, then you will see that the document is
completely unknown to the system. So the CCAMP WG (chairs)
have never requested publication of this document (or if
they did it was never entered into the system and so now 
it really got lost).

WG chairs... what is the status according to you?

Thanks,
Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vishal Sharma [mailto:v.sharma@ieee.org]
> Sent: woensdag 17 september 2003 3:47
> To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert); Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be
> Cc: CCAMP; Kireeti Kompella; Ronald P. Bonica; Greg Bernstein; Eric
> Mannie; Alexey Zinin
> Subject: RE: Status of draft-ietf-ccamp-sdhsonet-control-02.txt
> 
> 
> Hi Bert and Dimitri,
> 
> Thanks for the clarifications.  While this helps to understand
> what happened to some documents that don't show up on the CCAMP
> web page, it still does not tell us the status of our specific
> draft.
> 
> So my question still remains I guess -- is this draft now
> with the IESG?
> 
> -Vishal
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 3:31 PM
> > To: 'Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be'; v.sharma@ieee.org
> > Cc: CCAMP; Kireeti Kompella; Ronald P. Bonica; Greg Bernstein; Eric
> > Mannie; Alexey Zinin
> > Subject: RE: Status of draft-ietf-ccamp-sdhsonet-control-02.txt
> > 
> > 
> > .. snip ..
> > 
> > > .. but other i-d's such as the gmpls survey(*) have
> > > also been removed from this webpage (its expiration date
> > > was may'03)
> > > 
> > > (*) but the survey still appears in the protocol implementation
> > > reports page (but also not in the i-d tracker):
> > > 
> > > 
> > <http://www.ietf.org/IESG/Implementations/MPLS-SIGNALING-Implement
> ation.txt>
> > 
> That is because this was a "implementation report" passed to 
> IESG with the
> request to publish various docs as stds track RFCs. So 
> (although it has 
> the format of an I-D) it has been saved permanently as a 
> separate report. 
> 
> Hope this helps/explains,
> 
> Bert
> 
>