Subject: RE: draft-syam-ipv6-state-model-00.txt

From: "Bound, Jim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 14:38:07 -0400

I believe it should have ietf in its name yes.
/jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Soohong Daniel Park [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2003 12:29 AM
> To: Bound, Jim; [email-masked]
> Cc: 'O.L.N.Rao'; 'Soohong Daniel Park'
> Subject: RE: draft-syam-ipv6-state-model-00.txt
> 
> 
> Hello Jim
> 
> > I have read this spec and don't see bugs at this point.  Is this 
> > document to feed work on MIB definitions for SNMP and network 
> > management?  Or just to describe as information the various 
> states in 
> > the draft?
> 
> The original intent is to be a Informational RFC as a result
> of our implementation but there is no any wall to refer 
> this document.  As you indicated, no bug is there.
> 
> Shoud this document have "ietf" in its name ?
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> Daniel (Soohong Daniel Park)
> Mobile Platform Laboratory, SAMSUNG Electronics 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
> > Behalf Of Bound, Jim
> > Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2003 3:28 AM
> > To: [email-masked]
> > Subject: draft-syam-ipv6-state-model-00.txt
> > 
> > 
> 
> > 
> > /jim
> > 
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> > [email-masked]
> > Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> 
> 

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------