Re: [pcp] single port PANA+PCP

[Margaret Wasserman <[e-mail]>]

Hi Alper,

On Aug 9, 2012, at 11:41 AM, Alper Yegin wrote:
> 
> There was a clear decision at the meeting to go with a PANA-based solution, not with EAP-over-PCP solution. Given that the decision is already made, why do we need to keep other options still floating in the WG document?

I'm not a WG chair, so it is not my place to call consensus of the room.  However, I don't _think_ we actually had consensus at that point in the discussion...  IIRC (and you should feel free to refer to the minutes when available to check my memory), about 1/3 of the people who expressed an opinion preferred a PCP-specific approach and 2/3 preferred a PANA-based approach (either a PANA encapsulation or a PCP/PANA demultiplexing).

There was, IIRC, consensus that we wanted a single-port solution.

I'm hoping we will emerge from the interim conference call with consensus on a single approach to pursue, and I currently expect it will be one of the PANA-based approaches.  However, I don't think that has been completely nailed down yet.

We also have the open question from Dave Thaler about whether to consider at DTLS-based approach.  I would be interested in hearing from other members of the WG whether a DTLS-based approach is of enough interest that we should document what that would look like, and include it in the trade-off discussion at the interim, or not.

I'm not really looking for _more_ choices here, but I would like us to fairly considered all of the sensible options and make a solid, technical choice.

Margaret