[dhcwg] WGLC summary on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-05: Failed

Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com> Tue, 11 February 2014 19:38 UTC

Return-Path: <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.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 3AB721A0711 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:38:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 nmDzq8v-TQcS for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:38:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-x236.google.com (mail-wi0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B43251A06F4 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:38:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f182.google.com with SMTP id f8so5163366wiw.15 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:38:54 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=rTUr4iuxxTaoF2HL4tcvdBf6vlD8BHeIBK/oTRQK/FA=; b=lWZdzNuyqVmr0s1xgQ8iRI09AWZakd23oBM4j7xnoEvJwQu9VNJbryx1ZZRv8aIAb6 +HkqNhG0jH14CyGCqrQWaLaN6LiY4cFETP2Z9WfVeaT0RrqjNGNFad6Lz0/4Uk1uOpFK WIYY9IjqtKnRHXreRwki9kX3TEjx3w44r7XC1WORGfkQUrWttvPcvVFW4jd5GD+YcjE3 YIsDNyf1PH8b1KyoeMIlSNmWUeW1A2dx+qBINbpp+okyACjS/aYlJ8sQw1KgsQc2tP53 cj80HAo0QK+56ZoeZ0hgKG5wzf9twq5827NDgzAQVrqJ0gR94989y/REx1d6Ka31zLz2 Yq1A==
X-Received: by 10.194.84.144 with SMTP id z16mr27803961wjy.23.1392147534717; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:38:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.0.100] (host-109-107-11-157.ip.jarsat.pl. [109.107.11.157]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id f7sm46325275wjb.7.2014.02.11.11.38.52 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:38:53 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <52FA7C49.9000900@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 20:38:49 +0100
From: Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
References: <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1AE2B09C@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <52DD7366.3000101@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <52DD7366.3000101@gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2
X-TagToolbar-Keys: D20140211203849339
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ole_Tr=F8an?= <ot@cisco.com>, "Bernie Volz \(volz\)" <volz@cisco.com>
Subject: [dhcwg] WGLC summary on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-05: Failed
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: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 19:38:58 -0000

On 20.01.2014 20:05, Tomek Mrugalski wrote:
> Since Bernie is co-author, I'll manage this work group last call on my
> own. Authors believe that stateful-issues-05 draft is ready for WG last
> call. Please post your comments no later than on February 3rd.
I'm sorry to announce that this document has failed its WGLC. There were
only three responses, one of them being from an author. I'm sorry, but
this is not enough to pass a last call.

With my chair hat off, I'm very disappointed at this. This is a very
good document and essential stepping stone that would help a lot with
3315bis work. We had a discussion with Bernie about why people didn't
respond to this. Perhaps there are too many WGLC/adoption calls lately,
so people are not able to cope up with the pace? Did people lost
interest in this work? That seems unlikely. Please keep in mind that the
support is not transitive. If you voiced your support during adoption
call, it does not imply that you still support that work during WGLC.
Perhaps there are too many other drafts being worked on at the same
time? Would it be helpful if we stopped accepting any new work until
existing drafts are done (or at least a majority of them)?

This document attempts to fix several protocol issues. This is
especially depressing, since Timothy Winters, who is involved in DHCPv6
interop testing explicitly mentioned that there are real life interop
issues observed. So this draft addressing a very real problem. It's not
a theoretical type of thing.

I'll work with Bernie and Ole on the next steps. There will likely be a
presentation about this draft in London.

Tomek