IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v4v6interim] [BEHAVE] [46translation] Proposal for new BEHAVEcharter

Margaret Wasserman <mrw@lilacglade.org> Thu, 23 October 2008 17:40 UTC

Return-Path: <v4v6interim-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: v4v6interim-archive@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-v4v6interim-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9F903A6A1D; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 10:40:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: v4v6interim@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v4v6interim@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90D2E3A6A2C for <v4v6interim@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 10:40:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.657
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.657 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.058, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Zgl8tEtNg4Dc for <v4v6interim@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 10:40:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from QMTA04.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta04.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [76.96.62.40]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C2D83A6A29 for <v4v6interim@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 10:40:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from OMTA06.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.51]) by QMTA04.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id WE1j1a00P16LCl054HhlBe; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:41:45 +0000
Received: from [10.2.0.63] ([69.33.111.74]) by OMTA06.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id WHhS1a00L1cMU3H3SHhVMa; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:41:41 +0000
X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=_eXVZI6L6acA:10 a=9ER3-GguvdgA:10 a=kwpamV_MTCDU6jv9GRsA:9 a=LEXJXwaLF0AGC5r4gHiPw9mOZccA:4 a=WuK_CZDBSqoA:10
Message-Id: <4C1AFFD1-34DF-4DDE-A081-09C652A63CF4@lilacglade.org>
From: Margaret Wasserman <mrw@lilacglade.org>
To: Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <031d01c93535$c85b1140$9d6d6b80@cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2)
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 13:41:24 -0400
References: <48F8539D.90608@ericsson.com> <48FB9C5E.8070402@gmail.com> <3E041E8D-8539-4A16-9188-86A1DCEEE62B@muada.com> <200810201358.29295.remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com> <8E5328A8-4937-41A8-A650-204795E074D1@muada.com> <5B78195C-1318-4325-8F98-BC19F59E1532@cisco.com> <01462145-8E18-465A-8989-D1C98D421DED@muada.com> <B5A2E7E1-7FAE-48B6-85E2-B1300DF1458D@cisco.com> <9E0384AB-A20B-44E7-8575-9275101FF920@muada.com><49008B8E.9080408@ericsson.com> <49008F1E.3010804@cisco.com> <EE6DCD77-43B9-40A8-B0BC-FAE79B3D8B49@lilacglade.org> <031d01c93535$c85b1140$9d6d6b80@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.929.2)
Cc: v4v6interim@ietf.org, '46Translation' <46translation@employees.org>, 'Behave WG' <behave@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v4v6interim] [BEHAVE] [46translation] Proposal for new BEHAVEcharter
X-BeenThere: v4v6interim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of coexistence topics for the 01-Oct-2008 v4-v6 coexistence interim meeting <v4v6interim.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4v6interim>, <mailto:v4v6interim-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/v4v6interim>
List-Post: <mailto:v4v6interim@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v4v6interim-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4v6interim>, <mailto:v4v6interim-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes"
Sender: v4v6interim-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: v4v6interim-bounces@ietf.org

On Oct 23, 2008, at 1:35 PM, Dan Wing wrote:
> BEHAVE is being re-chartered, so if the community wants BEHAVE to
> do NAT66, now is a good time to tell the IESG to include NAT66 in
> BEHAVE's charter.  (as you all know.)  The new charter, at this
> time, does not include NAT66.
>
> And I only stated my desire to avoid the 'third rail'; the IESG can
> certainly decide they want NAT66 standardized.  Based on my
> understanding of how NAT66 would work, it would belong in BEHAVE.

Thanks, Dan.  This is very reasonable.

So, what's the best way forward?  Perhaps I could write a draft, sent  
a pointer to behave, and we could have a discussion over the next  
couple of weeks about whether the community does/doesn't want to  
include this in the new behave charter?

Margaret

_______________________________________________
v4v6interim mailing list
v4v6interim@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4v6interim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email