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

Lakshminath,
your recollection of the original discussion about the call for
consensus is correct. However, since there have been several comments or
questions on the draft, we do not feel there is consensus on approving
the draft as WG draft. We believe that a reasonable way to ensure those
questions are clarified and that we get good input on the draft is to
have the mobdir review the draft first.

Stefano 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: ext Lakshminath Dondeti [mailto:ldondeti@qualcomm.com] 
>Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 11:50 AM
>To: gabriel montenegro; mipshop@ietf.org
>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 <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
>

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