Re: Proposed IESG statement on draft-srisuresh-ospf-te-05.txt

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>]

yes, I'm behind on mail....

if this is not yet sent, I'd like to add a tweak.

--On tirsdag, mai 06, 2003 14:53:03 -0700 Alex Zinin <zinin@psg.com> wrote:

> Bert,
>
> > > > Is this document really one that falls under the
> > > "interferes with WG?"
> > >
> > > It is.
> > >
> > > > I don't want to overuse this category to pushback on everything. My
> > > > impression was more like no body thinks very much of this document,
> > >
> > > this too.
> > So I think both points should be made, no?
> How about this.
>
> The IESG has considered draft-srisuresh-ospf-te
insert:

and has consulted with the chairs of the OSPF and CCAMP WGs to determine 
what effect publishing this draft would have on ongoing IETF activities.

> . The subject of the
> draft is within the charter of the OSPF WG that is completing its work
> on OSPF traffic engineering extensions (draft-katz-yeung-ospf-traffic).
> draft-srisuresh-ospf-te was discussed in and rejected by the OSPF WG.
> Given the above, and the work items expected to be taken on by the
> CCAMP WG (including inter-area traffic engineering), the IESG believes
> that publishing draft-srisuresh-ospf-te as an RFC at this moment would
> interfere with ongoing activities within these WGs. The IESG recommends
> that the RFC Editor does not publish draft-srisuresh-ospf-te at this
> moment.
>
> Alex
If it's already sent, don't bother.