Multicast Mobility in Mobile IP Version 6 (MIPv6): Problem Statement and Brief Survey
Draft of message to be sent after approval:
From: The IESG <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org Cc: The IESG <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com Subject: Re: Informational RFC to be: draft-irtf-mobopts-mmcastv6-ps-08.txt The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'Multicast Mobility in MIPv6: Problem Statement and Brief Survey' <draft-irtf-mobopts-mmcastv6-ps-08.txt> as an Informational RFC. The IESG would also like the IRSG or RFC-Editor to review the comments in the datatracker (https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=16068&rfc_flag=0) related to this document and determine whether or not they merit incorporation into the document. Comments may exist in both the ballot and the comment log. The IESG contact person is Jari Arkko. A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-irtf-mobopts-mmcastv6-ps-08.txt The process for such documents is described at http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html. Thank you, The IESG Secretary
Technical Summary This document is a problem statement about multicast mobility. Working Group Summary This is a product of the MOBOPTS RG at the IRTF. Document Quality This document has the consensus of the MOBOPTS RG behind it. Personnel The responsible AD is Jari Arkko. RFC Editor Note The IESG has reviewed this document and believes that the following response from RFC 3932 Section 3 is appropriate: 2. The IESG thinks that this work is related to IETF work done in the MULTIMOB WG, but this does not prevent publishing. IRTF Note Not applicable. IESG Note The following note from RFC 3932 Section 4 applies: This RFC is not a candidate for any level of Internet Standard. The IETF disclaims any knowledge of the fitness of this RFC for any purpose and notes that the decision to publish is not based on IETF review apart from IESG review for conflict with IETF work. The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at its discretion. See RFC 3932 for more information. However, if this document is published as an RFC after the RFC 3932bis and headers and boilerplates documents have been approved, no note is required.