IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mif] Decision regarding MIF

Erik Kline <ek@google.com> Mon, 09 May 2016 07:14 UTC

Return-Path: <ek@google.com>
X-Original-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76B4A12D0A6 for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 May 2016 00:14:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.697
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.697 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_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com
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 oUrnNTgrTttg for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 May 2016 00:14:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ig0-x22e.google.com (mail-ig0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BB4A12B074 for <mif@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 May 2016 00:14:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ig0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id u10so96677821igr.1 for <mif@ietf.org>; Mon, 09 May 2016 00:14:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Z4e7iV6GVhQheuoys8a5hrShFb7DOLP1nVdvJSJ6KD4=; b=dfREekRLkIIy2wB4CCGgJjOJ0JZ6gJ/Fgv5emrk/uidtqEDpKBsZ1+YKEa3hD5M5x9 gmOYOzfsCvmy12XuTfzNmrCzgj1a2i5Rd257XEBaq6qB315EodATQZb004v+dSqW4OiK znRT5ElpL9VxUODEw+DYB8kZimcPO4sd01DERyngxchKc1rojijy6jMLs/Vh3j2F5s2c XYTinEAgqQ7rPbV4aF/Y1BxdgfzQVxQ97eYk3FH/YVyTllKdwQ73iCyGWyO/5Qxgkarf kl/Smb7S5CFd2hQQvC+45cYywhlmOn2IKgasXdZlvn3e20NYsTovE83NcDWNNRVz5kUz FY2Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Z4e7iV6GVhQheuoys8a5hrShFb7DOLP1nVdvJSJ6KD4=; b=Rwbi2V4oVAvRhftfSdTkTBUUdjLH5DHXwgZX/Fu/mYpFFpxwkiwov82G5Mv5/EDVTn /foNENOFpuBFdYD6KKBgVnKRG/1cu2rrQooH7iYD0Bp83g69P0jRs6SeaorUYNx1Abx/ klw4CzHdrDi6sz6bTVzX5wRNknzW/+SFdXlZ0pgQpqZZOF8Yh1/lwxHEbtCMkaq6tLBN xLlj9Um6XCjQBUxQwBRzRfsTV2qu0tvlgz37nztzgELOVZ4AyqzuSaI/lGt9jxus9SGF W7HADuGJXFv3S/F6AwBCvdLF3SjGI/sCBefQU1//shj0TytezG/eZJ2PY5/rWw8v9qe+ 1caw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FUYwqVwX3uTn3fy6XYBD4ExDPY1O2tkCFZRdLTW51XqqLlhRXe/3fOBu79uWkZu8+ewmhie+kfQySc7AZCO
X-Received: by 10.50.1.105 with SMTP id 9mr9014781igl.1.1462778060738; Mon, 09 May 2016 00:14:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.64.129.5 with HTTP; Mon, 9 May 2016 00:14:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1605090858430.7599@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <D3560151.876CF%terry.manderson@icann.org> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1605090858430.7599@uplift.swm.pp.se>
From: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
Date: Mon, 09 May 2016 16:14:01 +0900
Message-ID: <CAAedzxq4DNX2HzFBa78ShrNO0ZnpSAjbbUufFqxmrHDLEKQ86A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mif/4rD7ue1PEgbkX6haLl1dag46kdw>
Cc: "mif@ietf.org" <mif@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mif] Decision regarding MIF
X-BeenThere: mif@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiple Interface Discussion List <mif.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mif/>
List-Post: <mailto:mif@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 May 2016 07:14:23 -0000

This past weekend I worked on splitting my pvd api doc into 2 docs (as
requested back in Yokohama).  FWIW, I was thinking to send them to
intarea when they're done being separated.

On 9 May 2016 at 16:10, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:
> On Sun, 8 May 2016, Terry Manderson wrote:
>
>> I will be closing the MIF Working Group, however I will be leaving the
>> Mailing List open for ongoing discussion.
>
>
> Hi,
>
> With the MIF working group closed, where should work in this area be done?
>
> I don't really care where the work is done, as long as it gets done.
> INTAREA?
>
> Since we're seeing people show up with solutions and request these to be
> implemented (draft-mccann-dmm-prefixcost for instance), I'd like to see this
> being coordinated somewhere. Or is there no agreement that this should be
> coordinated?
>
> Because I don't think we'll find the best technical architecture overall by
> working groups independently coming up with solutions in the same space and
> then go and request L3 protocol enhancements individually without overall
> coordination. In my view, this would mean that either nothing gets done
> (because 6MAN will say no), or we get too many solutions in the same problem
> space leading to fragmentation and different technologies not playing nice
> with each other.
>
> So while I realise why you've made your decision, this is the one question
> that is still left unanswered for me.
>
> --
> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se
>
> _______________________________________________
> mif mailing list
> mif@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email