Re: some thoughts on IPv6-over-IPv6CS (was: [16NG] Re: review of the new revision (ipv6 over ipcs))

Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@motorola.com> Thu, 25 January 2007 17:39 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HA8ZS-0005N5-BE; Thu, 25 Jan 2007 12:39:34 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HA8ZQ-0005N0-Vq for 16ng@ietf.org; Thu, 25 Jan 2007 12:39:32 -0500
Received: from mail128.messagelabs.com ([216.82.250.131]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HA8ZP-0006QS-LO for 16ng@ietf.org; Thu, 25 Jan 2007 12:39:32 -0500
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: alexandru.petrescu@motorola.com
X-Msg-Ref: server-15.tower-128.messagelabs.com!1169746770!1274375!1
X-StarScan-Version: 5.5.10.7.1; banners=-,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [144.189.100.105]
Received: (qmail 12912 invoked from network); 25 Jan 2007 17:39:30 -0000
Received: from motgate5.mot.com (HELO motgate5.mot.com) (144.189.100.105) by server-15.tower-128.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 25 Jan 2007 17:39:30 -0000
Received: from az33exr01.mot.com (az33exr01.mot.com [10.64.251.231]) by motgate5.mot.com (8.12.11/Motorola) with ESMTP id l0PHdU3G028544; Thu, 25 Jan 2007 10:39:30 -0700 (MST)
Received: from [10.161.201.117] (zfr01-2117.crm.mot.com [10.161.201.117]) by az33exr01.mot.com (8.13.1/8.13.0) with ESMTP id l0PHdSTZ025706; Thu, 25 Jan 2007 11:39:29 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <45B8EB50.4070400@motorola.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 18:39:28 +0100
From: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@motorola.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Windows/20061025)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya@ieee.org>
Subject: Re: some thoughts on IPv6-over-IPv6CS (was: [16NG] Re: review of the new revision (ipv6 over ipcs))
References: <146825.56111.qm@web60319.mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <146825.56111.qm@web60319.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab
Cc: 16ng@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: 16ng@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: 16ng working group discussion list <16ng.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng>, <mailto:16ng-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/16ng>
List-Post: <mailto:16ng@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:16ng-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng>, <mailto:16ng-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: 16ng-bounces@ietf.org

Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
> One additional comment: An informational standard has a totally 
> different aim/focus than this document: an informational standard may
>  define an architecture which IETF normally does not or an 
> informational standard may be a team report on evaluating various 
> choices and recommending the selected one.

How about EXPERIMENTAL status?

> Even if this document is not published as standards track RFC, there
>  will be inter operability testing of the mobiles and the network and
>  some test cases are going to be derived from this document.

Thanks, that is good to know.

> Let's do it the right way: I favor publication as standards track 
> RFC.

Could you please clarify whether you're an author of this document or
not, just for the record.

Alex

_______________________________________________
16NG mailing list
16NG@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng