IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: New Version Notification for draft-donley-ipv6-cpe-rtr-use-cases-and-reqs-00

Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com> Fri, 24 July 2009 22:46 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08DA93A69E4 for <ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2009 15:46:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -108.268
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-108.268 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, RDNS_NONE=0.1, SARE_SUB_OBFU_Q1=0.227, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 XKoHPBUsLSYB for <ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2009 15:46:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EAE83A6AB3 for <v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jul 2009 15:46:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org>) id 1MUTR4-000C4h-AH for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Fri, 24 Jul 2009 22:40:18 +0000
Received: from [144.254.224.140] (helo=ams-iport-1.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <fred@cisco.com>) id 1MUTQz-000C3e-0M for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 24 Jul 2009 22:40:15 +0000
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.43,266,1246838400"; d="scan'208";a="45804994"
Received: from ams-dkim-2.cisco.com ([144.254.224.139]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 24 Jul 2009 22:40:11 +0000
Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com (ams-core-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.150]) by ams-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n6OMe99t012886; Sat, 25 Jul 2009 00:40:09 +0200
Received: from [10.43.1.19] (ams3-vpn-dhcp7352.cisco.com [10.61.92.183]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6OMeAwN009236; Fri, 24 Jul 2009 22:40:10 GMT
Cc: Chris Donley <C.Donley@cablelabs.com>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>, "Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" <wbeebee@cisco.com>
Message-Id: <1DEE0213-5F4A-4626-8F85-93EA7D364541@cisco.com>
From: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, "Hemant Singh (shemant)" <shemant@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A67B6F2.7050608@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3)
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-donley-ipv6-cpe-rtr-use-cases-and-reqs-00
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 00:40:10 +0200
References: <B1ED8A2E683E16479C92C3F4AE13677B01E1A92E@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <B00EDD615E3C5344B0FFCBA910CF7E1D07A0270F@xmb-rtp-20e.amer.cisco.com> <B1ED8A2E683E16479C92C3F4AE13677B01E1AD62@srvxchg3.cablelabs.com> <4A67B6F2.7050608@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=698; t=1248475209; x=1249339209; c=relaxed/simple; s=amsdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=fred@cisco.com; z=From:=20Fred=20Baker=20<fred@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20New=20Version=20Notification=20for=20dr aft-donley-ipv6-cpe-rtr-use-cases-and-reqs-00 |Sender:=20; bh=3eRrC8kpM0TEAUckjIgpT9HG1n+HcYuh0Qo+SeIyB2c=; b=Nv1P751/dSztNuSlbX94NyerxTf8RRkNWD+QZuJuafvKcPSQjO0Mbgqehn EEw4+/2Qeid43JiB+tmW4jaTsXBGFzdx9kFdP4U6wuj+iI5ewsfNIpAj2UzE y+vRDObzez;
Authentication-Results: ams-dkim-2; header.From=fred@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/amsdkim2001 verified; );
Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <v6ops.ops.ietf.org>

On Jul 23, 2009, at 3:03 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

>> As you suggested, there is a significant degree of overlap between  
>> our
>> respective drafts.  That is intentional.  We tried to align as much  
>> as
>> possible to avoid confusion.
>
> But I'm afraid that's impossible. Two overlapping documents =  
> confusion,
> by definition. I think the only reasonable goal is a combined  
> document,
> or possibly two complementary documents.

Here I have to agree. The preferred outcome is either one draft that  
covers the subject or two drafts on different aspects of the topic.  
Part of the working group discussion will be to determine the  
appropriate way forward.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email