Skip to main content

Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) Vendor Protocol
draft-ietf-pppext-vendor-protocol-02

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2012-08-22
02 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the Yes position for Thomas Narten
2004-03-08
02 Amy Vezza State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza
2004-03-08
02 Amy Vezza IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent
2004-03-08
02 Amy Vezza IESG has approved the document
2004-03-08
02 Amy Vezza Closed "Approve" ballot
2004-03-06
02 Thomas Narten State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup by Thomas Narten
2004-03-06
02 Thomas Narten
[Note]: 'IESG: This document has a normative reference to RFC 2153, which is an informational document. The reference could easily be made non-normative. This …
[Note]: 'IESG: This document has a normative reference to RFC 2153, which is an informational document. The reference could easily be made non-normative. This document could also be made informational instead. Thoughts on best approach solicited.' has been cleared by Thomas Narten
2004-03-06
02 Thomas Narten [Ballot Position Update] Position for Thomas Narten has been changed to Yes from Discuss by Thomas Narten
2004-02-12
02 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-pppext-vendor-protocol-02.txt
2003-12-04
02 Amy Vezza Removed from agenda for telechat - 2003-12-04 by Amy Vezza
2003-12-04
02 Amy Vezza State Changes to IESG Evaluation::AD Followup from IESG Evaluation by Amy Vezza
2003-12-04
02 Amy Vezza [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for  by Amy Vezza
2003-12-04
02 Bert Wijnen [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for  by Bert Wijnen
2003-12-04
02 Alex Zinin [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for  by Alex Zinin
2003-12-04
02 Bill Fenner [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for  by Bill Fenner
2003-12-04
02 Margaret Cullen [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for  by Margaret Wasserman
2003-12-04
02 Jon Peterson [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for  by Jon Peterson
2003-12-03
02 Harald Alvestrand
[Ballot comment]
I think this should go out as informational, to follow the tradition of 2153.
I can't find a reference for the IANA considerations …
[Ballot comment]
I think this should go out as informational, to follow the tradition of 2153.
I can't find a reference for the IANA considerations of PPP protocol numbers - are they FCFS?
2003-12-03
02 Harald Alvestrand [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for  by Harald Alvestrand
2003-12-03
02 Steven Bellovin [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for  by Steve Bellovin
2003-12-02
02 Ted Hardie [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for  by Ted Hardie
2003-12-02
02 Russ Housley [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for  by Russ Housley
2003-11-29
02 Ned Freed [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for  by Ned Freed
2003-11-26
02 Thomas Narten State Changes to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for Writeup by Thomas Narten
2003-11-26
02 Thomas Narten Placed on agenda for telechat - 2003-12-04 by Thomas Narten
2003-11-26
02 Thomas Narten
[Ballot discuss]
Document has a normative reference to RFC 2153, which is informational. Need thought on best way to fix (put 2153 on standards …
[Ballot discuss]
Document has a normative reference to RFC 2153, which is informational. Need thought on best way to fix (put 2153 on standards track, make this informational, or make reference non-normative -- all seeme doable).
2003-11-26
02 Thomas Narten [Ballot Position Update] Position for Thomas Narten has been changed to Discuss from Yes by Thomas Narten
2003-11-26
02 Thomas Narten
[Note]: 'IESG: This document has a normative reference to RFC 2153, which is an informational document. The reference could easily be made non-normative. This …
[Note]: 'IESG: This document has a normative reference to RFC 2153, which is an informational document. The reference could easily be made non-normative. This document could also be made informational instead. Thoughts on best approach solicited.' added by Thomas Narten
2003-11-26
02 Thomas Narten [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Thomas Narten
2003-11-26
02 Thomas Narten Ballot has been issued by Thomas Narten
2003-11-26
02 Thomas Narten Created "Approve" ballot
2003-11-25
02 (System) State has been changed to Waiting for Writeup from In Last Call by system
2003-11-04
02 Amy Vezza Last call sent
2003-11-04
02 Amy Vezza State Changes to In Last Call from Last Call Requested by Amy Vezza
2003-11-04
02 Thomas Narten Last Call was requested by Thomas Narten
2003-11-04
02 Thomas Narten State Changes to Last Call Requested from Publication Requested by Thomas Narten
2003-11-04
02 (System) Ballot writeup text was added
2003-11-04
02 (System) Last call text was added
2003-11-04
02 (System) Ballot approval text was added
2003-11-04
02 Dinara Suleymanova Draft Added by Dinara Suleymanova
2003-10-15
01 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-pppext-vendor-protocol-01.txt
2003-07-24
00 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-pppext-vendor-protocol-00.txt