RE: [netlmm] Conclusion of Consensus Call on WG Document Adoption

"Narayanan, Vidya" <vidyan@qualcomm.com> Fri, 06 April 2007 22:51 UTC

Return-path: <netlmm-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HZxHS-0002t8-0U; Fri, 06 Apr 2007 18:51:42 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HZxHQ-0002sv-U0 for netlmm@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2007 18:51:40 -0400
Received: from ithilien.qualcomm.com ([129.46.51.59]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HZxHP-0005fY-GL for netlmm@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2007 18:51:40 -0400
Received: from neophyte.qualcomm.com (neophyte.qualcomm.com [129.46.61.149]) by ithilien.qualcomm.com (8.13.6/8.12.5/1.0) with ESMTP id l36Mpbkf002992 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 6 Apr 2007 15:51:37 -0700
Received: from SANEXCAS02.na.qualcomm.com (sanexcas02.qualcomm.com [172.30.36.176]) by neophyte.qualcomm.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/1.0) with ESMTP id l36MpbqQ030385; Fri, 6 Apr 2007 15:51:37 -0700
Received: from NAEX13.na.qualcomm.com ([129.46.51.248]) by SANEXCAS02.na.qualcomm.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 6 Apr 2007 15:51:37 -0700
x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [netlmm] Conclusion of Consensus Call on WG Document Adoption
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 15:51:36 -0700
Message-ID: <C24CB51D5AA800449982D9BCB9032513575882@NAEX13.na.qualcomm.com>
In-Reply-To: <C23AA2DB.33551%basavaraj.patil@nsn.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [netlmm] Conclusion of Consensus Call on WG Document Adoption
Thread-Index: Acd3lkcsuSIMnlXZR+ej5LxtWrFF7QAFa1o2ADxzt5A=
References: <C24CB51D5AA800449982D9BCB903251357570E@NAEX13.na.qualcomm.com> <C23AA2DB.33551%basavaraj.patil@nsn.com>
From: "Narayanan, Vidya" <vidyan@qualcomm.com>
To: Basavaraj Patil <basavaraj.patil@nsn.com>, netlmm@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Apr 2007 22:51:37.0108 (UTC) FILETIME=[21D45D40:01C7789E]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 244a2fd369eaf00ce6820a760a3de2e8
Cc:
X-BeenThere: netlmm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETLMM working group discussion list <netlmm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm>, <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/netlmm>
List-Post: <mailto:netlmm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm>, <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: netlmm-bounces@ietf.org

Hi Raj,
I've just sent an email summarizing the next steps. It would be good to
go ahead and submit a 00 version after the IPv4 and MIP6 interactions
are removed. That needs to be done either way, whether we have a 00 now
and revise that in 01 or have a slightly delayed 00. 

Thanks,
Vidya

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Basavaraj Patil [mailto:basavaraj.patil@nsn.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 10:58 AM
> To: Narayanan, Vidya; netlmm@ietf.org
> Cc: ext Sri Gundavelli
> Subject: Re: [netlmm] Conclusion of Consensus Call on WG 
> Document Adoption
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Shall we go ahead and submit draft-sgundave-mip6-proxymip6 as 
> Rev0 of the WG document (draft-netlmm-proxymip6-00)?
> 
> -Raj
> 
> 
> On 4/5/07 10:22 AM, "ext Narayanan, Vidya" 
> <vidyan@qualcomm.com> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > All,
> > The consensus call for WG document adoption for the PMIPv6 protocol 
> > has concluded. Based on all the responses received, it 
> appears that we 
> > have rough consensus to adopt draft-sgundave-mip6-proxymip6 as the 
> > baseline for a WG protocol document. Please note that this 
> only means 
> > that we will use that document as a starting point and the document 
> > must reflect WG consensus on all points discussed until now 
> or later.
> > 
> > There is a separate question of whether the WG is interested in 
> > standardizing the approach of anchoring the MAG 
> functionality as well. 
> > I will send out a separate email seeking input on that. I will also 
> > send an update on the open issues that we discussed in Prague.
> > 
> > As a reminder, the WG will have an opportunity to review 
> the position 
> > once we have heard about the IPR situation from all the parties 
> > concerned. The current IPR status is still the same as presented at 
> > the Prague meeting (Please see Slide 5 of 
> > http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/07mar/slides/netlmm-0.pdf for 
> > reference).
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Vidya
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > netlmm mailing list
> > netlmm@ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm
> 
> 

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