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

Hi Raj,

> 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    [ ]

Regards,
-- 
Hidetoshi

(2011/08/11 6:34), 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   [ ]
> 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   [ ]
> 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
> 
> 
> 