IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [multimob] Polling WG on draft-ietf-multimob-pmipv6-source-07

Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> Thu, 09 January 2014 20:51 UTC

Return-Path: <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: multimob@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: multimob@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C12F21AE1AC for <multimob@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 12:51:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gMkIGZ4snTYJ for <multimob@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 12:51:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lb0-x236.google.com (mail-lb0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E4C71AE159 for <multimob@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 12:51:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lb0-f182.google.com with SMTP id l4so2757317lbv.13 for <multimob@ietf.org>; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 12:51:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=7fgnDSiBGlmIEDtmOwNaA4yjlsHgGGSQFaok4z3T2p4=; b=vnZTLS7rEjtgByfagKm3dYqK9B7kDEui/01UlfURTc6vhAy7DLqyWUb2+MUwvPfTYo dosgNXMeoNxkQgRR7Fcc5+Z3HxwbT9M4Ws4uoorf0HTPjNXmZWoB3a4A5+b3zUivAZE2 7FErJAXsB2LYPGIGe4Oer024DDGEY0p9FjPtcB9hubCsqrKZ1y0wPx70Bgu1GsMMeg1G DJThcRIpHBkHcbPvUjsKYDgNqtEUZ5rHfSflOiGGhyTS+luLUbSXxua30uGSazXFn8ZS 8kqx3vmwy/vZbyULP26f+Qb2rTLPCagRiO1RIdlAneVvE+L0O6ubMm5YwEKRv0v3Enl7 ypng==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.1.5 with SMTP id 5mr2274450lai.20.1389300676851; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 12:51:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.114.170.193 with HTTP; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 12:51:16 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <52CF081A.9010608@informatik.haw-hamburg.de>
References: <CAC8QAcdYk0dioXh7x3_Offq+2Ykg2OhS70Nw9j3TcdHjGg_v+A@mail.gmail.com> <52CF081A.9010608@informatik.haw-hamburg.de>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 14:51:16 -0600
Message-ID: <CAC8QAcctaN7m23iE9oW7NQpPbx3GQ6TF08e4ZVBuiXJZR4_Nbw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
To: "Thomas C. Schmidt" <schmidt@informatik.haw-hamburg.de>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e013c6644547cce04ef8fc5a1"
Cc: "multimob@ietf.org" <multimob@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [multimob] Polling WG on draft-ietf-multimob-pmipv6-source-07
X-BeenThere: multimob@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org
List-Id: Multicast Mobility <multimob.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/multimob>, <mailto:multimob-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/multimob/>
List-Post: <mailto:multimob@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:multimob-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob>, <mailto:multimob-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 20:51:28 -0000

Hi Thomas,



On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Thomas C. Schmidt <
schmidt@informatik.haw-hamburg.de> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I do not think that IETF procedures allow for WG chairs to garble drafts
> after they had successfully passed WG last call.
>
>
This is not garbling the draft.

Please refer to the shepherd document:

http://www.ietf.org/iesg/template/doc-writeup.html

In order to answer positively many questions like 2, Working Group Summary,
or 4,

We need to get WG's opinion.

I personally am confused.

Regards,

Behcet


> Am I mistaken, Brian?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Thomas
>
>
> On 09.01.2014 21:12, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Before shepherding this document to IESG we would like to get consensus
>> opinion on one issue regarding this document that came up recently.
>> Please refer to my conversation with Thomas on the list.
>>
>> ISSUE:
>> Multimob WG has not worked on PIM at MAG for receiver mobility, we only
>> worked on Proxy at MAG as per RFC 6224.
>> However draft-ietf-multimob-pmipv6-source-07 covers PIM at MAG for
>> source mobility starting with Section 4.3.
>>
>> Question:
>>
>> Do you support covering PIM at MAG for source mobility, then say YES,
>>
>> if you do not support it then say NO.
>>
>> We need as many people as possible to express opinion on this issue. The
>> deadline is one week from today, January 16, 2014.
>>
>> If WG consensus does not exist, we will ask the authors to remove PIM at
>> MAG sections (subsections) and we will submit the revised document to
>> IESG.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Behcet
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> multimob mailing list
>> multimob@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob
>>
>>
> --
>
> Prof. Dr. Thomas C. Schmidt
> ° Hamburg University of Applied Sciences                   Berliner Tor 7 °
> ° Dept. Informatik, Internet Technologies Group    20099 Hamburg, Germany °
> ° http://www.haw-hamburg.de/inet                   Fon: +49-40-42875-8452°
> ° http://www.informatik.haw-hamburg.de/~schmidt    Fax: +49-40-42875-8409°
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email