[v6ops] Agenda prep for IETF 85
"Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com> Thu, 18 October 2012 10:39 UTC
Return-Path: <fred@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2614A21F8552 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 03:39:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.216
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.216 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.383, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GIx61mlol-9O for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 03:39:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45F8721F8540 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 03:39:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3922; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1350556778; x=1351766378; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=Mf1Dofz7EAMOSXUfYL31ZI8knyW7HnVHw/S72d+pfiA=; b=gwYof2k5tRYZ9tzKbz4RHUmoRvHdrDEgIjyxRPv54CvQxzYDRoyEaWuZ qQozq+AWvTtYYRKHjT+V/DptuoksyEkqk/jUyEtVM9MsbcOcu4Vrc/RIj 6P1brmIzeBFFO+tH99Rh3tnSB2SFw5RscupMNSMpX3kgRYO0bQrmJ/elb U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EAOfbf1CtJV2Z/2dsb2JhbABFwDyBCIIhAQEEEgEnTwIBKhQQMiUCBBsMDodiC5wQoCGROmADlwCNNIFrgm+CFw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,606,1344211200"; d="scan'208";a="132953511"
Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Oct 2012 10:39:37 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x03.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x03.cisco.com [173.36.12.77]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q9IAdbFm010187 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 10:39:37 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([169.254.9.68]) by xhc-aln-x03.cisco.com ([173.36.12.77]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 05:39:37 -0500
From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
To: IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Agenda prep for IETF 85
Thread-Index: AQHNrRzeDhq8jBFlakGAAd4dY7BqoQ==
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 10:39:37 +0000
Message-ID: <8C48B86A895913448548E6D15DA7553B17DC79@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com>
References: <74C29719-6EA0-4462-895F-7B182769FDC3@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <74C29719-6EA0-4462-895F-7B182769FDC3@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.66.246.198]
x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-10.2.0.1135-7.000.1014-19284.002
x-tm-as-result: No--36.890000-8.000000-31
x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No
x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <C6ED0C4ED98CCE47ABEFCB87662A6303@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [v6ops] Agenda prep for IETF 85
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 10:39:39 -0000
Joel and I are starting to plan the agenda for IETF 85. We currently have two two-hour slots on Thursday afternoon; due to a conflict with PCP, we're trying to move one of those to another slot. On that point, stay tuned. That said, this is the state of play, and what I think our proposed agenda might be. We are looking for your comments on both the agenda and (implied) some of the new drafts that aren't yet on it. Dates and names come from my copy of the draft directory and http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/search/?name=v6ops&rfcs=on&activeDrafts=on&search_submit=: In RFC Editor queue: Feb 21 draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-multihoming-without-ipv6nat-04.txt Sep 11 draft-ietf-v6ops-wireline-incremental-ipv6-06.txt Oct 12 draft-ietf-v6ops-ivi-icmp-address-07.txt In IESG Sep 26 draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis-11.txt In Ron's queue May 22 draft-ietf-v6ops-ra-guard-implementation-04.txt Waiting for chairs to submit (RSN): Sep 17 draft-ietf-v6ops-icp-guidance-04.txt Sep 19 draft-ietf-v6ops-464xlat-08.txt Older, and not on our radar unless updated Apr 27 draft-jiang-v6ops-v4v6mc-proxy-01.txt Apr 30 draft-gundavelli-v6ops-community-wifi-svcs-04.txt May 10 draft-templin-v6ops-isops-17.txt May 19 draft-foo-v6ops-6rdmtu-00.txt Jun 20 draft-lopez-v6ops-dc-ipv6-02.txt Jun 29 draft-matthews-v6ops-design-guidelines-00.txt Jul 5 draft-generic-v6ops-tunmtu-09.txt Jul 16 draft-ma-v6ops-terminal-test-01.txt Jul 16 draft-liu-v6ops-ula-usage-analysis-03.txt Jul 16 draft-zhang-v6ops-ipv6oa-iwf-01.txt "ID Exists" and posted since last IETF: Aug 7 draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-00.txt Aug 17 draft-smith-v6ops-larger-ipv6-loopback-prefix-01.txt Sep 16 draft-ietf-v6ops-enterprise-incremental-ipv6-01.txt Sep 29 draft-yang-v6ops-fast6-01.txt Oct 5 draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-host-reqs-rfc3316update-03.txt Oct 10 draft-byrne-v6ops-64share-03.txt Oct 15 draft-korhonen-v6ops-rfc3316bis-00.txt Oct 15 draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-00.txt Oct 15 draft-yang-v6ops-ipv6tran-select-00.txt Oct 16 draft-gont-v6ops-slaac-issues-with-duplicate-macs-00.txt Oct 16 draft-taylor-v6ops-fragdrop-00.txt I have received private feedback on draft-korhonen-v6ops-rfc3316bis, and note that it is related to the topic of another draft that will make it to the agenda. I have yet to see list comments on draft-yang-v6ops-fast6 and draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix, and the one comment on draft-gont-v6ops-slaac-issues-with-duplicate-macs isn't very supportive. We'll wait to see interest before adding them to the agenda. draft-taylor-v6ops-fragdrop grew out of a conversation at the interim meeting a few weeks ago, so I'm inclined to entertain the discussion even though mailer discussion right now doesn't favor its approach. My proposed agenda: one meeting: draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience draft-ietf-v6ops-enterprise-incremental-ipv6 draft-smith-v6ops-larger-ipv6-loopback-prefix draft-yang-v6ops-ipv6tran-select the other meeting: draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-host-reqs-rfc3316update draft-korhonen-v6ops-rfc3316bis draft-byrne-v6ops-64share draft-taylor-v6ops-fragdrop That is open to change if there is expressed interest in the drafts I didn't include, including drafts updated this week. >From my perspective, the primary objectives in this meeting will be: What do we want to do with draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience? Is it done? What changes does it still need? What do we want to do with draft-ietf-v6ops-enterprise-incremental-ipv6? Is it done? What changes does it still need? Do we, and how do we, want to update RFC 3316? As we look at the issues brought up in the other drafts, of course we will also be wondering what the best outcome is. Your thoughts?
- [v6ops] Agenda prep for IETF 85 Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: [v6ops] Agenda prep for IETF 85 Fred Baker (fred)