Subject: [conex] Fwd: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-conex-concepts-uses-02.txt

From: Bob Briscoe <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 01:21:14 +0100

ConEx folks,

We've posted a new -02 rev of conex-concepts-uses.

>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-conex-concepts-uses-02.txt
>
>Diff from previous version:
>http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-conex-concepts-uses-02

Main changes from draft-ietf-conex-concepts-uses-01 to -02:

1) Completely new Abstract & Introduction.
2) Concepts and Non-Goals sections added around existing slightly 
altered definitions.
3) Clarifications to Existing Traffic Management section and
4) Clarifications to Use-Cases section, with Other use Cases Added.
5) Deployment Arrangements Section added (but only bulletted content 
within it).

We'd appreciate review comments, particularly on the most recent 
changes that haven't seen discussion on the list (2,3,4,5)

We had hoped to produce a document that at least had no {ToDo} 
elements left in it, but it still needs another few hours work.

Bob & Rich

________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe,                                BT Innovate & Design

---

From: John Leslie <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 20:33:25 -0400

> We've posted a new -02 rev of conex-concepts-uses.

   Congratulations! (It's getting pretty late in the day for Bob...)

> 1) Completely new Abstract & Introduction.

   I've spent some time on the Introduction, but don't feel able to
comment without seeing how it fits the rest of the document.

> 2) Concepts and Non-Goals sections added around existing slightly 

   My quick take is that the "blame" word is very dangerous -- I'll
see if I can wordsmith around it.

> 5) Deployment Arrangements Section added (but only bulletted content 

   These will have to wait until tomorrow -- or Wednesday, as I have
some day-job responsibilities pending...

> elements left in it, but it still needs another few hours work.

   Don't sweat that! Give it a few days' rest!

--
John Leslie <[email-masked]>