Re: Take NAP as WG document?

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

Hi,

(probably the last thing with the co-chair hat on)

There seem to have been no objections to taking NAP a WG item, though 
there has been some good discussion for improvement (thanks!).

Authors, please submit the next version as draft-ietf-v6ops-nap-00.txt 
(if you'd be revising it within the next 2 weeks, and if not, just 
publish the current version as -00.)  Please also state when sending 
the draft to internet-drafts@ietf.org that the submission obsoletes 
draft-vandevelde-v6ops-nap-01.txt.

(hat off)

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, Pekka Savola wrote:
> (co-chair hat on, still for a while :)
>
> In the v6ops session, there seemed to be strong consensus to take "IPv6 
> Network Architecture Protection" <draft-vandevelde-v6ops-nap-01.txt> as a WG 
> item for Informational.
>
> If you have issues with this, please raise them within a week, by 16th March.
>
> Thanks!
>
> (hat off)

--
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings