Re: Consensus to move draft-caviglia-mp2cpcp2mp-03 to WG satus

["Diego Caviglia" <Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com>]

Folks,
       a week has passed from the below e-mail, there has been only one
replay from a carrier the answers were for yes for both question 2 and 3.

Now I'll try to put the question in a different way.

Do anyone think that the ID should not be moved to WG status?

Regards

Diego





"Diego Caviglia" <Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com>@ops.ietf.org on 29/11/2005
08.08.59

Sent by:    owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org


To:    ccamp@ops.ietf.org
cc:    "Dino Bramanti" <Dino.Bramanti@marconi.com>, "Dan Li <danli"

Subject:    Consensus to move draft-caviglia-mp2cpcp2mp-03 to WG satus


Hi all,
           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 Carries
community.

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 useful
tool?

3.        Should the ID moved to the WG status?

Of course my answer for 2 and 3 are Yes and Yes ;-)

Regards

Diego