Subject: [port-srv-reg] UDP-Lite

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:30:08 +0200

Hi,

When reviewing a draft that uses UDP-lite I realized that we aren't 
talking about UDP-Lite. The UDP-Lite RFC talks about UDP-Lite having the 
same rules and space as UDP. I think we should include a clarification 
that this is the case in our draft also and call out that the document 
applies also to UDP-Lite.

We should also work towards some progress on the update. I understand 
Joe owns a token here.

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund

IETF Transport Area Director & TSVWG Chair
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone +46 8 4048287
Färögatan 6                | Fax   +46 8 7575550
S-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [email-masked]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Port-srv-reg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/port-srv-reg

---

From: Joe Touch <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 11:08:03 -0700

> We should also work towards some progress on the update. I understand

Yup. ;-(

Joe

---

From: Lars Eggert <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 10:08:02 +0300

>> We should also work towards some progress on the update. I understand

In truth, I'd rather see Joe spend his limited IETF cycles on the TCP- 
AO stuff right now. I do want to get this pub-requested and off our  
plate ASAP. If that means no update of the ports draft before MSP, so  
be it. (The ports draft has other folks that cold do some writing,  
like, um, the rest of us...)

Lars

---

From: Joe Touch <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 16:53:51 -0700

Lars Eggert wrote:
> In truth, I'd rather see Joe spend his limited IETF cycles on the TCP-AO
> stuff right now. I do want to get this pub-requested and off our plate
> ASAP. If that means no update of the ports draft before MSP, so be it.
> (The ports draft has other folks that cold do some writing, like, um,
> the rest of us...)

TCP-AO is on the top of the stack, FWIW.

I'm trying to wrap-up the pending edits on that this weekend.

Joe