RE: [Mipshop] Re: Gauging interest in official WG adoption ofinternet drafts
Lakshminath Dondeti <ldondeti@qualcomm.com> Tue, 11 April 2006 17:58 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FTN8I-0001Tp-CK; Tue, 11 Apr 2006 13:58:30 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FTN8G-0001Tk-Sj for mipshop@ietf.org; Tue, 11 Apr 2006 13:58:28 -0400
Received: from numenor.qualcomm.com ([129.46.51.58]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FTN8G-0003UL-1O for mipshop@ietf.org; Tue, 11 Apr 2006 13:58:28 -0400
Received: from crowley.qualcomm.com (crowley.qualcomm.com [129.46.61.151]) by numenor.qualcomm.com (8.13.6/8.12.5/1.0) with ESMTP id k3BHwPas002591 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 11 Apr 2006 10:58:26 -0700
Received: from LDONDETI.qualcomm.com (qconnect-10-50-73-230.qualcomm.com [10.50.73.230]) by crowley.qualcomm.com (8.13.6/8.12.5/1.0) with ESMTP id k3BHwOHd012339 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 11 Apr 2006 10:58:25 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20060411105603.0547abe0@qualcomm.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 10:58:18 -0700
To: stefano.faccin@nokia.com, gabriel_montenegro_2000@yahoo.com, mipshop@ietf.org
From: Lakshminath Dondeti <ldondeti@qualcomm.com>
Subject: RE: [Mipshop] Re: Gauging interest in official WG adoption ofinternet drafts
In-Reply-To: <33B0AB1B4BA65042831AE04C0836E20301820757@daebe101.NOE.Noki a.com>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20060411102937.039c5e60@qualcomm.com> <33B0AB1B4BA65042831AE04C0836E20301820757@daebe101.NOE.Nokia.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: ec7c6dab5a62df223002ae71b5179d41
Cc:
X-BeenThere: mipshop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: mipshop.ietf.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.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://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop>, <mailto:mipshop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: mipshop-bounces@ietf.org
At 10:44 AM 4/11/2006, stefano.faccin@nokia.com wrote: >Yes, there was approval on the idea of proceeding with consensus on WG >approval first, then mobdir review. Right, this was my understanding too. >Now, since there does not seem to be >WG consensus, are you suggest we do not do the mobdir at all? I don't understand the first part. Why do you say that there does not seem to be WG consensus? The latest I recall from this discussion was that there was approval and consensus to make this a WG draft first. I am not saying no Mobdir review. Let's make it a WG draft and then have the Mobdir review the draft. >I see >going to mobdir review as a way to improve the draft to increase the >chances to reach a consensus as soon as possible. No disagreement here, but you seem to have a different order of steps in mind than I do. I am wondering how you reached your conclusion. thanks and regards, Lakshminath >Stefano > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: ext Lakshminath Dondeti [mailto:ldondeti@qualcomm.com] > >Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 12:35 PM > >To: Faccin Stefano (Nokia-SIR/Dallas); > >gabriel_montenegro_2000@yahoo.com; mipshop@ietf.org > >Subject: RE: [Mipshop] Re: Gauging interest in official WG > >adoption ofinternet drafts > > > >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, stefano.faccin@nokia.com 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: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 > > > > _______________________________________________ Mipshop mailing list Mipshop@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
- [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG adoptio… gabriel montenegro
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… James Kempf
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Soohong Daniel Park
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Yoshihiro Ohba
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Lakshminath Dondeti
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Yoshihiro Ohba
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Lakshminath Dondeti
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Yoshihiro Ohba
- RE: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Soliman, Hesham
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Lakshminath Dondeti
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Wassim Haddad
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… James Kempf
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… James Kempf
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Rajeev Koodli
- RE: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Wassim Haddad
- RE: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Soliman, Hesham
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… James Kempf
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… James Kempf
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Wassim Haddad
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Yoshihiro Ohba
- RE: [Mipshop] Re: Gauging interest in official WG… stefano.faccin
- OptiSEND and FMIP SEND-based Key Provisioning (wa… James Kempf
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Junghoon Jee
- Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG ado… Behcet Sarikaya
- [Mipshop] Re: Gauging interest in official WG ado… gabriel montenegro
- Re: [Mipshop] Re: Gauging interest in official WG… Lakshminath Dondeti
- RE: [Mipshop] Re: Gauging interest in official WG… stefano.faccin
- Re: [Mipshop] Re: Gauging interest in official WG… James Kempf
- RE: [Mipshop] Re: Gauging interest in official WG… Lakshminath Dondeti
- RE: [Mipshop] Re: Gauging interest in official WG… Lakshminath Dondeti
- RE: [Mipshop] Re: Gauging interest in official WG… gabriel montenegro
- Re: [Mipshop] Re: Gauging interest in official WG… James Kempf