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

["James Kempf" <[e-mail]>]

Right, I thought that as well. And I didn't see any WG request for MDIR 
review on the other two drafts.

I believe both drafts (draft-kempf-mobopts-handover-key-01.txt and 
draft-arkko-mipshop-cga-cba-03.txt) have been extensively reviewed in 
MOBOPTS prior to being referred to MIPSHOP (Rajeev, please correct me if 
here if I am wrong).


            jak

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lakshminath Dondeti" <[e-mail]>
To: "gabriel montenegro" <[e-mail]>; 
<[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 9:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Mipshop] Re: Gauging interest in official WG adoption 
ofinternet 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 <[e-mail]> 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
>>[e-mail]
>>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mipshop mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
> 



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