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

[Lakshminath Dondeti <[e-mail]>]

Hi Stefano,

Thanks for your message.  Once the proposal to "make the draft a WG 
item and then ask for Mobdir review" was made, I recall seeing 
approvals and no disagreements.  So, I am still puzzled!

thanks and regards,
Lakshminath

At 09:54 AM 4/11/2006, [e-mail] wrote:
>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:[e-mail]]
> >Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 11:50 AM
> >To: gabriel montenegro; [e-mail]
> >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


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