Server/Application State Protocol v1
RFC 4678

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, <iana@iana.org>, ietf-announce@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Informational RFC to be: draft-bivens-sasp-05.txt 

The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'Server/Application State 
Protocol v1' <draft-bivens-sasp-05.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=12152&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 Magnus Westerlund.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bivens-sasp-05.txt


The process for such documents is described at http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html.

Thank you,

The IESG Secretary

Technical Summary
 
   RFC-editor publication and not reviewed for technical fitness.
 
Working Group Summary
 
   This work was presented in the RSERPOOL WG but was decieded to be out of
   scope for the WG. This is minuted in the RSERPOOL minutes for IETF 64.
 
Protocol Quality
 
This was reviewed by IESG for relation with IETF work according to RFC 3932.
Responsible Area Director was Magnus Westerlund. No technical review was
performed.

Note to RFC Editor
 
      The IESG has not found any conflict between this document and IETF
      work.

IESG Note

      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 in particular notes that the decision to publish
      is not based on IETF review for such things as security,
      congestion control, or inappropriate interaction with deployed
      protocols.  The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at
      its discretion.  Readers of this document should exercise caution
      in evaluating its value for implementation and deployment.  See
      RFC 3932 for more information.