Subject: [PCN] status of cl and sm edge docs?

From: David Harrington <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 14:57:24 -0500

Hi,

I notice the status in the document has been changed from Informational to
Experimental, but in the datatracker it is still Informational.
Can somebody point me to the discussion thread for this change to
Experimental?

--
David Harrington
Director, Transport Area
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[email-masked]
+1-603-828-1401

---

From: Tom Taylor <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 16:41:30 -0500

It was Joel Halpern's comment, but I see rev iewing my response that 
this didn't go to the list. Can I confirm that Experimental is agreeable 
to the WG?

On 06/03/2012 2:57 PM, David Harrington wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> PCN mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 21:44:39 +0000

Hi Tom,

It is agreeable to me!

Best regards,
Georgios

________________________________________
Van: [email-masked] [[email-masked]] namens Tom Taylor [[email-masked]]
Verzonden: dinsdag 6 maart 2012 22:41
Aan: David Harrington
CC: [email-masked]
Onderwerp: Re: [PCN] status of cl and sm edge docs?

---

From: Scott O Bradner <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 22:59:01 -0500

wfm

On Mar 6, 2012, at 4:41 PM, Tom Taylor wrote:

> It was Joel Halpern's comment, but I see rev iewing my response that this didn't go to the list. Can I confirm that Experimental is agreeable to the WG?
>

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 08:31:38 +0100

Hi Tom,

agreeable with me too.

Regards, Ruediger

---

From: "ietfdbh" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 11:15:57 -0500

Hi,

Every IESG is different, and some of the current, continuing members are
particular about Experimental status. 

I fully expect you will be asked to make changes to the document to describe
in the Introduction what the experiment is, who should participate in the
experiment, how long should the experiment run, what are the evaluation
criteria, and what is the expected follow-up to such an experiment?

Since we plan to close PCN after these docs get through, we cannot plan on
specific follow-up. Here is some suggested text for the last part:
"After the experiment, the IETF community might choose to advance these from
Experimental to standards-track, by creating a new PCN-related WG, having
the work done in another WG such as TSVWG, or advancing the docs as
AD-sponsored. That will be a decision that will need to be made by the
community after the experiment concludes." 

Please put together a few paragraphs to introduce the experiment.
If you provide the new text to me before the IESG telechat, I can handle
this as a note to the RFC Editor.

David Harrington
Transport Area Director
[email-masked]
+1-603-828-1401