IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6?

Mohana Jeyatharan <Mohana.Jeyatharan@sg.panasonic.com> Tue, 16 August 2011 01:13 UTC

Return-Path: <Mohana.Jeyatharan@sg.panasonic.com>
X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B700721F8CC5 for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:13:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.09
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pqigBkPUNexM for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:13:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.mei.co.jp (smtp.mei.co.jp [133.183.100.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17E0921F8CC4 for <netext@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:13:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gw.jp.panasonic.com ([157.8.1.157]) by smtp.mei.co.jp (8.12.11.20060614/3.7W/kc-maile13) with ESMTP id p7G1DlUS023552; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 10:13:47 +0900 (JST)
Received: from pslexc01.psl.local ([10.81.112.5]) by mail.jp.panasonic.com (8.11.6p2/3.7W/kc-maili14) with ESMTP id p7G1Dkd12344; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 10:13:47 +0900
Received: from PSLEXC02.psl.local ([10.81.112.4]) by pslexc01.psl.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 16 Aug 2011 09:13:38 +0800
Received: from PSLEXC02.psl.local ([fe80::9c06:d1db:685d:9713]) by pslexc02.psl.local ([fe80::9c06:d1db:685d:9713%14]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 09:13:46 +0800
From: Mohana Jeyatharan <Mohana.Jeyatharan@sg.panasonic.com>
To: "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" <Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com>, "netext@ietf.org" <netext@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6?
Thread-Index: AQHMV6n4iQzLbboj+0iLXz1Fln8x05UetFBA
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 01:13:45 +0000
Message-ID: <3B9866CDE401014DB02613517E88E1E60576BD2B@pslexc02.psl.local>
References: <CA686B71.1CF5F%basavaraj.patil@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA686B71.1CF5F%basavaraj.patil@nokia.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.81.113.96]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2011 01:13:38.0347 (UTC) FILETIME=[BA843FB0:01CC5BB1]
Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6?
X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " <netext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netext>, <mailto:netext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext>
List-Post: <mailto:netext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext>, <mailto:netext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 01:13:01 -0000

Hi all,

I support the adoption of this draft.

The answers to the questions are:
[1] Yes
[2] Yes

BR,
Mohana

> -----Original Message-----
> From: netext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:netext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 6:08 AM
> To: netext@ietf.org
> Subject: [netext] Consensus call: Specify Access Network Information Option
> for Proxy Mobile IPv6?
> 
> 
> The proposal: "Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6"
> <draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt> Was discussed at
> the IETF81 Netext WG meeting.
> 
> Rough consensus from polling the WG members in the room indicated:
> "
> 5 have read the draft
> 4 think it is a relevant problem and we have to solve it
> 2 think it is no clear reason to carry more than ATT "
> 
> This email is a follow up on the WG ML before we make a decision. So please
> respond to the following questions:
> 
> Q1: Do you agree with the problem, solution and benefit of the ANI option as
> described in I-D:
> draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt?
> 
> Yes  [ ]
> No   [ ]
> 
> Q2: Do you support adoption of the I-D
> draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt as the starting point
> for working on this feature in the WG?
> 
> Yes  [ ]
> No   [ ]
> 
> 
> Please respond by August 18th to the above questions on the ML.
> 
> -Chairs
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netext mailing list
> netext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email