IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-conn-status-00.txt

"Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com> Thu, 06 February 2014 00:12 UTC

Return-Path: <volz@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D5EF1A0290 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 16:12:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.036
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b5sBuVaOymQf for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 16:12:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EA6B1A0284 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 16:12:21 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1661; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1391645541; x=1392855141; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=ml/xE8qDhv1Ux7xfH+n8OOa8LsU9lrkU8KqQVy623Tg=; b=SZw4LSbxo6Qnkidkrs+5tdVy2v8L3UsTP8P9dNhwNX4B0pvC2zAHcmmS /A2LR9HQ2IAIyd6fHVsHDZQ/49vD5c38a2IPvjUoYGkogV+dDmIhfRja1 ZEZdIRadypErDAXwM2Hk1cfxykklbyvb7mtBJ1lBFJ1cOd2YfJgje41pM Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgMFAJLS8lKtJXG+/2dsb2JhbABZgwyBD75egQoWdIIlAQEBAwEdHT8FBwQCAQgRBAEBAQoUCQcyFAkIAgQOBQgTh2IIznAXjkQxBwaDHoEUAQOqTIMtgio
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,789,1384300800"; d="scan'208";a="302140162"
Received: from rcdn-core2-3.cisco.com ([173.37.113.190]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Feb 2014 00:12:20 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x01.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x01.cisco.com [173.36.12.75]) by rcdn-core2-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s160CKQ8011660 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 6 Feb 2014 00:12:20 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com ([169.254.8.213]) by xhc-aln-x01.cisco.com ([173.36.12.75]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 18:12:19 -0600
From: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
To: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-conn-status-00.txt
Thread-Index: AQHPIqGT9bzRNIc0t0+9ZDQfaLepUpqnNbHAgAB+coD//6Wu8A==
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 00:12:19 +0000
Message-ID: <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1AE598AB@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com>
References: <20140204093611.4914.51694.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <52F0F3C2.20807@viagenie.ca> <4B094E1A-431F-4F2B-9004-37D6D12BE8F8@nominum.com> <52F0F8F4.4060905@viagenie.ca> <EEEC392B-7B7B-4AAE-BE24-AEC944DFABFA@nominum.com> <CF17B34D.17390%praspati@cisco.com> <07C71B9E-3D2B-4714-9A5C-67C51B9F028F@nominum.com> <CF183474.17FEB%praspati@cisco.com> <48ADF973-C96B-415D-BA95-0EE5311114E2@nominum.com> <CF184487.18206%praspati@cisco.com> <D3DCF5DD-549F-4F73-B33E-8F6A428606BD@nominum.com> <52F25607.8060706@s-carlsen.dk> <1C267188-BEF2-47C5-9347-D50132FF6D73@nominum.com> <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1AE594E4@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <50C073ED-1B32-45FE-947E-BAA451353D4D@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <50C073ED-1B32-45FE-947E-BAA451353D4D@nominum.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.86.255.226]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "dhcwg@ietf.org WG" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-conn-status-00.txt
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 00:12:23 -0000

> Did this in fact come about as the result of some consensus from v6ops that this work was needed?

Not to my knowledge.

If you won't allow it on the Charter, we will have to drop it. (That might even be the outcome if it does go on the charter.) From the call for adoption, there was support for this work and no one against it.

- Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: Ted Lemon [mailto:ted.lemon@nominum.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2014 6:32 PM
To: Bernie Volz (volz)
Cc: Sten Carlsen; dhcwg@ietf.org WG
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-conn-status-00.txt

On Feb 5, 2014, at 5:14 PM, Bernie Volz (volz) <volz@cisco.com> wrote:
> Yeah, I was kind of skeptical about this too ... but (at least some) coauthors are from a router vendor, so they obviously believe this is worth doing (or getting someone within their organization to do). And, that issue was asked at the Vancouver IETF:

The fact that someone who works for Cisco thinks Cisco might implement this isn't an indication that Cisco will implement it.   Maybe they will, maybe they won't.   That's why I was asking if there was demand for this solution.

I realize that this has been adopted by the working group, and that we talked about whether it fits with the charter, but if I agreed that it fit, I don't know what I was smoking.   What's interesting about this work is its operational aspect.   So the motivation for doing this should be coming from an ops working group, not the DHC working group.

Did this in fact come about as the result of some consensus from v6ops that this work was needed?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email