Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6?

Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com> Wed, 10 August 2011 22:46 UTC

Return-Path: <sgundave@cisco.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 00B9E21F8B5C for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:46:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.018
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.018 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.419, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 1rMqj6myPmJk for <netext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:46:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F5A321F8B46 for <netext@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:46:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=sgundave@cisco.com; l=1437; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1313016428; x=1314226028; h=date:subject:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding; bh=RFEz4cR0g2BCI+W8CO3FQEM6kNLxwmd+VIdRL7sbmnc=; b=PLoMS5dEdg8ecI47YKXcNREL83FXL2C9P70CLiyJahWQzpLUK10kUbBA fwnHj2V7XfPs9UXrXyZetCtCSISYZRS6B7Um/xdCQtbOarVTLZlU9p8PZ EX9YBAAZokr7kWATtxStQ8wDh0xBNLUqQ/vgDSoPMRSg63zoXStFslmm7 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EABIKQ06rRDoH/2dsb2JhbABBpzx3gUABAQEBAgEBAQEPAScCATEdAQhtMAIEARIJEgeHTASgaAGeV4ZGBIdeiyyFE4t6
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,353,1309737600"; d="scan'208";a="11941910"
Received: from mtv-core-2.cisco.com ([171.68.58.7]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Aug 2011 22:46:56 +0000
Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by mtv-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p7AMktHP002022; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 22:46:55 GMT
Received: from xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:46:55 -0700
Received: from 10.32.246.212 ([10.32.246.212]) by xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 22:46:55 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.30.0.110427
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:46:54 -0700
From: Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com>
To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com, netext@ietf.org
Message-ID: <CA68586E.2401B%sgundave@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6?
Thread-Index: AQHMV6VIS+vHAvnEiUyuG4wvA5tZB5UWr4LV
In-Reply-To: <CA686394.1CF0F%basavaraj.patil@nokia.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2011 22:46:55.0546 (UTC) FILETIME=[6792A9A0:01CC57AF]
Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call: Work on specifying prefix delegation 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: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 22:46:36 -0000

1. YES
2. YES



On 8/10/11 2:34 PM, "Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com" <Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com>
wrote:

> 
> At IETF81, Carl Williams presented the I-D: "Prefix Delegation for
> Proxy Mobile IPv6" <draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt>
> 
> General consensus at the Netext WG meeting was that prefix delegation
> is a required feature for PMIP6. We gauged the interest in the room to
> adopt this I-D as the starting point of a WG I-D for the PD feature
> and observed the following:
> 
> "
> Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant: 19
> How many have read it: 7
> How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting
> point to work on the problem?
> In favor: 7 ;  Opposed: 1
> "
> 
> We are now following up with the questions on the ML.
> 
> Question to WG: 
> 
> 1. Should the WG specify prefix-delegation support for PMIP6?
> 
> Yes   [X]
> No    [ ]
> 
> 2. Can we adopt as WG document the solution proposed in I-D:
> draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt as the starting point of this
> feature?
> 
> Yes   [X]
> No    [ ]
> 
> Please respond by August 18th on the ML.
> 
> -Chairs
> 
> Please see the discussion at the IETF81 WG meeting on this topic at:
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/netext.txt
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netext mailing list
> netext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext