IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [fun] status of the homenet effort

Erik Kline <ek@google.com> Thu, 30 June 2011 15:02 UTC

Return-Path: <ek@google.com>
X-Original-To: fun@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: fun@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 584FE11E80A2 for <fun@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:02:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6CNZSToFabIG for <fun@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:02:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [216.239.44.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EE0911E8078 for <fun@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:02:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hpaq7.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq7.eem.corp.google.com [172.25.149.7]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p5UF2A0D018388 for <fun@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:02:10 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1309446130; bh=RExe1DDgQkceelfgQ3zp/E4YQrE=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=M5CfkYl/BUHla11d9xMfdZWastBOD7lNDjXAqoD7ZK1DUhCNEguDzL7H12XuDLQtm Mbg3j7ZngDcCnODN+7QZg==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=dkim-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date: message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; b=fAehPAR8NpoHarbAeIeNrBA64s3TCXVjhCbQBCfAiq9VU1aSR90Se5h1KUPb+f5Lr e1lTGC+d4YcUASkUunNbQ==
Received: from pzk28 (pzk28.prod.google.com [10.243.19.156]) by hpaq7.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p5UF1ldf015709 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for <fun@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:02:08 -0700
Received: by pzk28 with SMTP id 28so2090160pzk.36 for <fun@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:02:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=KkjF8YCiWoV9u08ptW08LaEf079r5xG6dE6FmOOKxfc=; b=VdAPjkjrFgiA2p51A+kwxYJ6zL7AaLpTf2l3Q3LYksc6xXF8fEPIamSh//qtzO7B5E jz5x7AVUr1UnCCXoiPkA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.142.121.15 with SMTP id t15mr1031657wfc.324.1309445755672; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 07:55:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.142.179.17 with HTTP; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 07:55:55 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA31F3ED.4AB6%jason.weil@twcable.com>
References: <98D97264-A266-41FB-9913-A48A7105F73F@townsley.net> <CA31F3ED.4AB6%jason.weil@twcable.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 23:55:55 +0900
Message-ID: <CAAedzxp0YmkD7WbVyJMs6OAf6Zt0FfHCP=ktkNgrGHaDiWG4yw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
To: "Weil, Jason" <jason.weil@twcable.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: "fun@ietf.org" <fun@ietf.org>, "homegate@ietf.org" <homegate@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [fun] status of the homenet effort
X-BeenThere: fun@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "FUture home Networking \(FUN\)" <fun.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/fun>, <mailto:fun-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/fun>
List-Post: <mailto:fun@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:fun-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fun>, <mailto:fun-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:02:15 -0000

> If we can stay focussed on solving just the basics for the five areas
> included, I believe it will be helpful. The other recommendation would be
> to work as expeditiously as possible. Providers in the process of
> deploying IPv6 now are already deep into this analysis and development
> with their vendors. If we wait too long then these topics will be solved
> with interoperability a possible casualty.

+1 to whatever can be done to get more industry implementors to IETF81
in a few weeks

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email