[Mipshop] Charter discussion
"Telemaco Melia (tmelia)" <tmelia@cisco.com> Fri, 18 April 2008 09:35 UTC
Return-Path: <mipshop-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: mipshop-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-mipshop-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BE0128C19D; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 02:35:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: mipshop@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mipshop@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9116328C19D for <mipshop@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 02:35:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jQq7wqwLKrHO for <mipshop@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 02:35:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01EEB28C196 for <mipshop@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 02:35:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,677,1199660400"; d="scan'208,217";a="6664325"
Received: from ams-dkim-2.cisco.com ([144.254.224.139]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Apr 2008 11:35:25 +0200
Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com (ams-core-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.150]) by ams-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m3I9ZPp8021538 for <mipshop@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:35:25 +0200
Received: from xbh-ams-331.emea.cisco.com (xbh-ams-331.cisco.com [144.254.231.71]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m3I9ZPGE007732 for <mipshop@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 09:35:25 GMT
Received: from xmb-ams-335.cisco.com ([144.254.231.80]) by xbh-ams-331.emea.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:35:25 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:36:16 +0200
Message-ID: <DD0238A0AAE9B74A8F70A91BDF497C2F038AE52F@xmb-ams-335.emea.cisco.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Charter discussion
Thread-Index: AcihN6ZjU6UBD1LhTL2JmWVJ8Aoi/A==
From: "Telemaco Melia (tmelia)" <tmelia@cisco.com>
To: Mipshop <mipshop@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Apr 2008 09:35:25.0458 (UTC) FILETIME=[87DA8F20:01C8A137]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=3990; t=1208511325; x=1209375325; c=relaxed/simple; s=amsdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=tmelia@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Telemaco=20Melia=20(tmelia)=22=20<tmelia@cisco. com> |Subject:=20Charter=20discussion=20 |Sender:=20; bh=0GIAt+g8hCbBUarTEHSZl+bG0hLYKVjTZM01RZkShAo=; b=ifSWTrWyIocFzyeFk68SUH2HOAqteo71pvI+oe5nuu5jgoRq29OI5UdK+k V7/nKJaD4fyG1D0KtbwJ3SwRI87g8msbVKCoOomp1yDGUuRyxHVL2xGdd6c3 +qxMBxj/Z0;
Authentication-Results: ams-dkim-2; header.From=tmelia@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/amsdkim2001 verified; );
Subject: [Mipshop] Charter discussion
X-BeenThere: mipshop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <mipshop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop>, <mailto:mipshop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:mipshop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mipshop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop>, <mailto:mipshop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2059846741=="
Sender: mipshop-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: mipshop-bounces@ietf.org
Hello, ID draft-ietf-mipshop-mstp-solution-02 has been updated according to the comments received during WGLC. I would like to recall that this document needs the specifications for DHCP and DNS extensions defined in the companion IDs draft-bajko-mos-dhcp-options-02 and draft-bajko-mos-dns-discovery-01, which are currently items of the recharter discussion. Now, considering the fact that Mipshop did not meet last time, how do we intend to proceed with the adoption of new documents as WG documents? Is there a consensus on the FMIP-PMIP and over-the-air tunneling optimization items? I hope folks understand that there is other work (MIH) that needs to be progressed quite quickly given the status of the correspondent SDO (in this case 802.21 WG). Comments? cheers, telemaco
_______________________________________________ Mipshop mailing list Mipshop@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
- [Mipshop] Charter discussion Telemaco Melia (tmelia)