Subject: RE: draft-kompella-l2vpn-l2vpn-02

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 15:41:00 +0200

Support Standard Track.

Lei

-----Original Message-----
From: "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A, ATTLABS" <dbrungard at att.com>
To: "Shane Amante" <shane at castlepoint.net>; l2vpn at ietf.org
Sent: 3/23/07 12:02 PM
Subject: RE: draft-kompella-l2vpn-l2vpn-02

Support *Standards Track*-
Deborah 

-----Original Message-----
From: Shane Amante [mailto:shane at castlepoint.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 12:27 PM
To: l2vpn at ietf.org
Subject: draft-kompella-l2vpn-l2vpn-02

I was approached by several people outside the hallway just after the 
L2VPN WG meeting expressing confusion over a poll in the room about 
making this draft a WG document, in particular over the 'Intended 
Status' of this WG draft, e.g.: Informational or Standards Track. 
Unfortunately, we were abruptly cut off after running over our time at 
the end of the meeting, in order so they could convert the room over for

the IETF plenary session, so I didn't have time to clarify it.  So, my 
apologies for the confusion.

Let me now ask a hopefully more precise question here: How many people 
are in favor of making the aforementioned draft a WG draft *if* the 
'Intended Status' is Standards Track?

Thanks,

-shane