Re: [Mipshop] Re: Gauging interest in official WG adoption of internet drafts

Hi,

I have a different recollection of the "consensus" on 
draft-vidya-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-01.  The order was, approve the 
draft as a WG item and then ask for a mobdir review.  Did I miss 
further discussions (offline ones perhaps) on this topic?

regards,
Lakshminath

At 07:48 AM 4/11/2006, gabriel montenegro wrote:
>Folks,
>
>Thanks for the comments and participation in this discussion. In general,
>there was good support for adoption of the proposed documents, but it seems
>that for the security-related drafts, there were negative comments
>and discussion than for the others.
>
>It was also suggested that a mobility directorate review would be a good
>thing. This is actually a common practice predating this discussion: new
>drafts being adopted by "mobility" working groups are requested for review
>by mobdir. So we will request that review for all our adopted drafts.
>However, we feel that given the comments on the security
>drafts, we would like to have reviews for those drafts before actual 
>adoption.
>
>In short, the drafts we're adopting right now are:
>
>    draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rev-XX.txt
>    based on draft-koodli-mipshop-rfc4068bis-00.txt
>
>    draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-XX.txt
>    based on draft-jang-mipshop-fh80216e-02.txt
>
>    draft-ietf-mipshop-3gfh-XX.txt
>    based on draft-yokota-mipshop-3gfh-02.txt
>
>Next versions of the above drafts should adopt the official name shown above.
>
>The drafts whose adoption is pending a mobility directorate review are:
>
>    draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-XX.txt
>    based on  draft-vidya-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-01.txt
>
>    draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-send-XX.txt
>    based on draft-kempf-mobopts-handover-key-01.txt (currently expired)
>
>    draft-ietf-mipshop-cga-cba-XX.txt
>    based on draft-arkko-mipshop-cga-cba-03.txt
>
>Again, we will request review of all the above by mobdir.
>
>-chairs
>
>--- gabriel montenegro <gabriel_montenegro_2000@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Folks,
> >
> > In today's meeting we talked about 4 potential items up for 
> adoption as official
> > working
> > groups. Talking with folks after the meeting, we've decided to 
> add two more to the list
> > of items we'll ask the WG whether we should adopt. This is the 
> follow-up email to
> > today's
> > discussion, to make sure we ask this on the mailing list.
> >
> > So the question to the WG is: Should we adopt the following 
> documents as official WG
> > items (based on the individual drafts as noted below)?:
> >
> > 1. draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rev-XX.txt
> > based on draft-koodli-mipshop-rfc4068bis-00.txt
> >
> > 2. draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-XX.txt
> > based on  draft-vidya-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-01.txt
> >
> > 3. draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-send-XX.txt
> > based on draft-kempf-mobopts-handover-key-01.txt (currently expired)
> >
> > 4. draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-XX.txt
> > based on draft-jang-mipshop-fh80216e-02.txt
> >
> > 5. draft-ietf-mipshop-3gfh-XX.txt
> > based on draft-yokota-mipshop-3gfh-02.txt
> >
> > 6. draft-ietf-mipshop-cga-cba-XX.txt
> > based on draft-arkko-mipshop-cga-cba-03.txt
> >
> > Please send comments one way or another through April 4, 2006.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > chairs
> >
> >
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>_______________________________________________
>Mipshop mailing list
>Mipshop@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop

_______________________________________________
Mipshop mailing list
Mipshop@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop