Re: [v4v6interim] BOF discussions

Fred,

I hear ya.  Maybe BOF was a wrong choice of words since it took people
in the direction of thinking we didn't have a WG on this one.  The
interim meeting was so much more productive compared to discussing this
lot in a few hours at IETF Dublin in a few WG's when at any IETF, any WG
is competing with tons of other WG's that folks would like to go to as
well. 

Soon as we focused folks into one WG and no other distractions, we did
move forward in the interim meeting rather than staying in limbo at IETF
meetings.  That is why I do like your idea of few right folks getting
together at next IETF to hash more things out and BOF is indeed the
right term for such a getting together.  By all means, let the
v4v6coexistence WG do its session(s) at the next IETF, but I do think
more work will be needed in more focused smaller groups outside of the
WG session(s).

Hemant

-----Original Message-----
From: Fred Baker (fred) 
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2008 4:02 PM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: v4v6interim@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v4v6interim] BOF discussions

What I'm suggesting is that the folks that need to discuss translation
- perhaps 15 of us total - sit down and talk about it, and the same
opportunity be available to the tunneling folks. My point is to foment
accomplishment; as Randy says, he needs this yesterday. I have no
problem with other discussions happening too and expect still to have a
requirements discussion in v6ops.

On Oct 2, 2008, at 3:19 PM, Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote:

> Fred,
>
> Good suggestion.  However, what if a BOF is needed to discuss a 
> solution where both xlat and tunnel are needed?  Do we discuss those 
> in this WG mailer or spawn a 3rd new BOF mailer?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Hemant
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: v4v6interim-bounces@ietf.org 
> [mailto:v4v6interim-bounces@ietf.org
> ]
> On Behalf Of Fred Baker (fred)
> Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 5:14 PM
> To: v4v6interim@ietf.org
> Subject: [v4v6interim] BOF discussions
>
> So various folks are going to be doing a lot of work in email and such

> in the next few weeks. May I suggest that the ADs schedule a BOF for 
> the translation solution and one for the tunneling solution (and one 
> for the
> 4-4-4 solution?) separate from WGs, to enable the doc authors to sit 
> down together and discuss?
>
> I would also suggest that you set of mailing lists for these BOFs, 
> perhaps called v4v6-xlat and v4v6-tunnel or some such. Announce them 
> to this forum and let people sign up the usual way.
> _______________________________________________
> v4v6interim mailing list
> v4v6interim@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4v6interim

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