Re: [Monami6] MCoA draft

Nicolas Montavont <nicolas.montavont@enst-bretagne.fr> Wed, 12 April 2006 06:09 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FTYXg-0005Pn-VD; Wed, 12 Apr 2006 02:09:28 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FTYXf-0005Om-1v for monami6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 Apr 2006 02:09:27 -0400
Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr ([192.44.77.17]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FTYXb-0007mv-Ix for monami6@ietf.org; Wed, 12 Apr 2006 02:09:27 -0400
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.13.4/8.13.4/2004.10.03) with ESMTP id k3C69Mss010585 for <monami6@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Apr 2006 08:09:22 +0200
Received: from l1.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (l1.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [192.44.77.3]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.13.4/8.13.4/2004.09.01) with ESMTP id k3C69KSJ010581 for <monami6@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Apr 2006 08:09:21 +0200
Received: from [82.240.205.125] (sud35-3-82-240-205-125.fbx.proxad.net [82.240.205.125]) (authenticated bits=0) by l1.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k3C69JQJ020251 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <monami6@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Apr 2006 08:09:20 +0200
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v749.3)
In-Reply-To: <1144820195.24464.16.camel@localhost>
References: <443BC71A.3020401@enst-bretagne.fr> <1144820195.24464.16.camel@localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; delsp="yes"; format="flowed"
Message-Id: <60BE7F1C-66BE-4F47-8B2C-ABE84A665769@enst-bretagne.fr>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Nicolas Montavont <nicolas.montavont@enst-bretagne.fr>
Subject: Re: [Monami6] MCoA draft
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 08:05:09 +0200
To: Monami6 WG <monami6@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.749.3)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at enst-bretagne.fr
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: b280b4db656c3ca28dd62e5e0b03daa8
X-BeenThere: monami6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Monami6 WG <monami6@ietf.org>
List-Id: Monami6 WG <monami6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6>, <mailto:monami6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/monami6>
List-Post: <mailto:monami6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:monami6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6>, <mailto:monami6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: monami6-bounces@ietf.org

Hi,

On Apr 12, 2006, at 7:36 AM, Chan-Wah Ng wrote:

> On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 17:11 +0200, Nicolas Montavont wrote:
>> Folks,
>>
>> According to the discussion at Vancounver and Dallas, we think  
>> that we
>> reached a rough consensus to accept
>
> Really?  Unless you call a ratio of less than 3 (for) : 1 (against) a
> "rough consensus" (which was what I counted in Dallas).

Most of people were for the adoption of the document as a WG  
document, including AD and chair of other WG.

The few people who were against failed to show major concerns (some  
issues are still unresolved of course, but this can be dealt while  
the document is a WG document.

>
>>
>> Multiple Care-of addresses registration
>> draft-wakikawa-mobileip-multiplecoa-05
>>
>> as a WG document for the 3rd deliverable:
>>
>>    - A protocol extension to Mobile IPv6 (RFC 3775) and NEMO Basic
>> Support (RFC 3963) to support the registration of multiple Care-of
>> Addresses at a given Home Agent address [Standard Track].
>>
>> The document has been improved between the 2 IETF meetings in a  
>> way that
>> we think meets the request of the WG members as expressed at  
>> Vancouver.
>
> Again, as mentioned in ML: I see at least two unresolved issues:
>
> - Bulk Registrations.
> - Simultaneously at home and foreign.

Sure, but we didn't say that the document is ready for the IESG.

>
>
> Having said all that, I am not against moving the draft to WG  
> draft.  In
> fact, changing it to WG draft would force us to maintain an issue  
> list,
> then we will truly know how many issues there are.

That's exactly our point, we believe that it is the best way to work  
on the document.

Nicolas

> I just wanted to
> keep the fact rights.
>
> /rgds
> /cwng
>
>> The document will therefore be forwarded to the IETF secretariat.
>>
>> In the meantime, do not hesitate to (continue to) comment on the  
>> draft.
>>
>> Nicolas & Thierry.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Monami6 mailing list
>> Monami6@ietf.org
>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Monami6 mailing list
> Monami6@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6


_______________________________________________
Monami6 mailing list
Monami6@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6