Subject: Re: [sfc] #6 (nsh): Version Handling

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 11:52:39 +0000

Paul, Uri, 

Wouldn't you at least add changes as agreed with Joel here: https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sfc/current/msg04165.html?

BTW, 

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : sfc [mailto:[email-masked]] De la part de sfc issue tracker
> Envoyé : vendredi 26 février 2016 22:44
> À : [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Cc : [email-masked]
> Objet : Re: [sfc] #6 (nsh): Version Handling
> 
> #6: Version Handling
> 
> Changes (by [email-masked]):
> 
>  * status:  new => closed
>  * resolution:   => wontfix
> 
> 
> Comment:
> 
>  Reply: Discussed on list: http://www.ietf.org/mail-
>  archive/web/sfc/current/msg03149.html.  There was no consensus to changed
>  the adopted format, in fact the value of version bits seems well accepted
>  and therefore no changes are needed and the topic should be marked as
>  resolved in the tracker.
> 
> --
> -------------------------------------+------------------------------------
> -
>  Reporter:                           |       Owner:  draft-ietf-sfc-
>   [email-masked]       |  [email-masked]
>      Type:  defect                   |      Status:  closed
>  Priority:  major                    |   Milestone:
> Component:  nsh                      |     Version:
>  Severity:  -                        |  Resolution:  wontfix
>  Keywords:                           |
> -------------------------------------+------------------------------------
> -
> 
> Ticket URL: <https://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/sfc/trac/ticket/6#comment:1>
> sfc <https://tools.ietf.org/sfc/>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sfc mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc