Re: [Softwires] Milestone update and closing/rechartering discussion

Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com> Wed, 14 October 2015 18:03 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D647B1AD1DB for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:03:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x_zddePa6uhF for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:03:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com (sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com [64.89.234.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9673A1AD186 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:03:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-03.win.nominum.com [64.89.235.66]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certificate Authority - G2" (verified OK)) by sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3DF8DA0089 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 18:02:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [10.0.20.146] (71.233.41.235) by CAS-03.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.100) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.224.2; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:02:59 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
From: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC8QAccZkUEHPBj3uUDiR-vfQzcrmExyMG=7cs65oqdFMinkUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 14:02:56 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <5C0C405A-8955-4C92-AC38-A996E0DD3064@nominum.com>
References: <E87B771635882B4BA20096B589152EF63A98C80B@eusaamb107.ericsson.se> <OF02A40BB4.B8981004-ON48257EDE.0028595A-48257EDE.0029922D@zte.com.cn> <CAC8QAccZkUEHPBj3uUDiR-vfQzcrmExyMG=7cs65oqdFMinkUQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Softwires WG <softwires@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
X-Originating-IP: [71.233.41.235]
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/softwires/K5poHnuo-7u2QxdOvCllnMRTPfA>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] Milestone update and closing/rechartering discussion
X-BeenThere: softwires@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: softwires wg discussion list <softwires.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/softwires/>
List-Post: <mailto:softwires@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 18:03:02 -0000

On Oct 14, 2015, at 11:55 AM, Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 2:34 AM,  <wang.cui1@zte.com.cn> wrote:
>>  As Mesh topology multicast, DS-lite multicast as well as multicast prefix
>> option documents are all going to be proposed as Standard, I think the
>> companion document
>> http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-hu-softwire-multicast-radius-ext-08.txt in
>> the potential items for rechartering Part 2 is also worthy to be included in
>> the rechartering process to form a set of solutions to solve multicast in
>> transiton scenarioes.
>> 
>>  Also as a coauthor of draft-hu-softwire-multicast-radius-ext-08, I think
>> this draft is mature to advance further :)
>> 
> 
> Me too, as a co-author, I would like to see MAP (and lw4over6)
> multicast to be taken up as charter item and yes this draft is also
> mature to advance.

Is there any market pressure behind the push to complete the multicast story for DS-lite, MAP and lw40ver6, or would we just be doing this for completeness?