Re: [MEXT] MEXT WG drafts (re)naming and submission

[Julien Laganier <[e-mail]>]

Hi Thierry,

On Wednesday 19 December 2007, Thierry Ernst wrote:
> Well, there are documents in the former WGs which may have been
> accepted as WG docs AFTER the MEXT charter was first drafted. If that
> was the case (i.e. the document was accepted by the WG and the AD,
> and listed as draft-ietf- on the WG charter), MEXT should inherit the
> document too... (the doc was anyway accepted at some point in time;
> it doesn't matter much if that was during the MEXT chartering process
> or the MIP6, NEMO or MonAmi6 process. The same applies for a document
> for which a WG may have decided to drop it for some reasons.

This is exactly what happened, with one motivated exception (see below): 
any WG draft of a former WG which has a corresponding deliverable in 
our charter was taken as a MEXT WG draft (see mails we chairs have been 
sending).

The single exception that rule pertains to prefix delegation for NEMO. 
Our charter has only one deliverable for a NEMO prefix delegation 
mechanism, but there were two NEMO WG drafts related to that. We 
decided that since there's no clear consensus for any of the two 
solutions, we will not adopt *yet* any of them, and rather wait for the 
WG to gain consensus on *one* prefix delegation mechanism, at which 
point we adopt the corresponding draft.

The above exception is well motivated: we as a WG should follow our 
charter.

> Jari, please inlight us about the procedure here.
>
> The same reasoning applies to the NEMO Prefix Delegation draft.
> However, the discussion we had on the list and during the WG seems to
> indicate that the 2 current solutions didn't receive enough feedback
> in the past, and there may be other ways. So, in that specific case,
> it is useful to reconsider the document (but the 2 were accepted as
> NEMO WG docs some time in the past).

See above. Seems to me that you should be satisfied about the current 
situation.

Best,

--julien

> Julien Laganier wrote:
> > Hi Raj,
> >
> > MEXT WG should work on items it is chartered to work on. 4285bis is
> > clearly not included in our current charter, thus it shouldn't be a
> > MEXT WG document.
> >
> > MEXT wise, a way forward is to include 4285bis as part of our
> > rechartering.
> >
> > --julien
> >
> > On Tuesday 18 December 2007, Basavaraj Patil wrote:
> >> RFC4285bis is a minor bug fix w.r.t the key length.
> >> If MEXT does not want to make this a WG doc, we can maybe progress
> >> it as a MIP6 WG doc.
> >> It has already completed WG LC in August, 07.
> >> Hence I have no problem forwarding it to the IESG for processing
> >> as a MIP6 WG doc.
> >>
> >> -Raj
> >>
> >>
> >> On 12/18/07 1:01 PM, "ext Vijay Devarapalli"
> >>
> >> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>> Hi Julien,
> >>>
> >>> Julien Laganier wrote:
> >>>> Previous WG drafts that the WG hasn't agreed to take as WG
> >>>> drafts, or have no corresponding work item in MEXT charter must
> >>>> not be submitted as draft-ietf-{mext,mip6,nemo,monami6}-*. Of
> >>>> course authors are free to submit them as individual submission,
> >>>> e.g. draft-*-mext-*:
> >>>>
> >>>>         draft-ietf-nemo-prefix-delegation
> >>>>         draft-ietf-nemo-dhcpv6-pd
> >>>>         draft-ietf-mip6-rfc4285bis
> >>>
> >>> 4285bis mainly fixes a bug (key length) in RFC 4285. In fact I
> >>> thought it was ready for a MIP6 WG last call. Raj, please correct
> >>> me if I am wrong. I think this document should be a MEXT WG
> >>> document.
> >>>
> >>> Regarding the other changes in the document (for example removing
> >>> the IESG note) should of course be discussed on the MEXT mailing
> >>> list.
> >>>
> >>>>         draft-ietf-mip6-generic-notification-message
> >>>
> >>> I thought we concluded we missed this document somehow and needs
> >>> to be added to the charter?
> >>>
> >>> Vijay
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> MEXT mailing list
> >>> [e-mail]
> >>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > MEXT mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext



_______________________________________________
MEXT mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext