Re: [Mipshop] MIPSHOP Draft Agenda for IETF 67

Alper Yegin wrote:
>> There was also consensus
>> (as much consensus as there has been for any document in MIPSHOP) for
>> adoption of this document. 
> 
> When was this consensus reached? I might have missed it, but I'd appreciate
> a reference. (Also, I don't know what is meant by " as much consensus as
> there has been for any document in MIPSHOP". Is there a different consensus
> building practice in this WG?)
> 
>> the WG needs to be convinced that these alternatives
>> are better and have advantages over the drafts that
>> are being considered currently.
> 
> What's going on is, there are multiple solutions for the same problems. The
> WG needs to evaluate and see if it makes sense to standardize one or more of
> the solutions. All I'm trying to confirm is that nothing is cast in stone,
> until all solutions are considered.

well, nothing is ever cast in stone.

however, Gabriel and Stefano initiated a consensus
call on the following documents (with a few other
documents) on March 21 2006.

    draft-kempf-mipshop-handover-key-00.txt
    draft-vidya-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-03.txt

from Gabriel's email on April 11 2006,

> 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.

the reviews we have received so far haven't raised
any significant technical concerns. with
draft-vidya-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-01.txt there
was an issue raised of having to charter new work
in the DIME and/or radext WGs.

let us know if you see any issues.

regarding draft-haddad-mipshop-hmipv6-security-06
Stefano initiated a WG consensus call for adopting
it as a WG document on July 17 2006. the result of
the consensus call

> -       draft-haddad-mipshop-hmipv6-security-04 (now in rev. 06): there has been a lot of discussion on the draft, with considerable comments and objections raised. In light of the very strong opposition, the chairs require further input on the draft and have submitted a request for feedback from the mobility directorate and the security directorate. We’re therefore delaying the decision on the adoption/non adoption.

Vijay

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