IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis WGLC

"Ralph Droms (rdroms)" <rdroms@cisco.com> Sat, 24 March 2012 11:26 UTC

Return-Path: <rdroms@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 D4BC521F86FD for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 04:26:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.966
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.966 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.034, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DENeKGgEs0W2 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 04:26:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23E0821F845C for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 04:26:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=rdroms@cisco.com; l=2070; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1332588400; x=1333798000; h=subject:references:content-transfer-encoding:from: in-reply-to:message-id:date:to:cc:mime-version; bh=E/1ZsuhFsH+D1F9vngyV2qE08F74UJ9hLurMQqUX6k4=; b=csB6j4fDiSyRX67KEPJ0ATw+4ZJk5r5vwo1sgSrrOECgo827ySrN+LYq svJl+Y4RpzH+VqOvq8JW2sfq9PjX8l6nQAPw8qTOgysAwPvIygAMkTxBP HM/DsCmydMX1hw6neI4/Dv0s4oUtuoxxJXOkskqFxalxy+vZKa+ha1HCR g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AsMJAHCubU+tJV2d/2dsb2JhbABEhT+xYX4CgQeCCQEBAQMBAQEBDwEQEToLEAIBCBgCAiYCAgIlMAEBBBMih2MFC5lYjQiRVwSBL45hNWMElWCORYFogmiBWw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,641,1325462400"; d="scan'208";a="69091744"
Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 24 Mar 2012 11:26:39 +0000
Received: from xbh-rcd-302.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-302.cisco.com [72.163.63.9]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q2OBQdDH014488; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 11:26:39 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-202.cisco.com ([72.163.62.209]) by xbh-rcd-302.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sat, 24 Mar 2012 06:26:39 -0500
Received: from 72.163.43.39 ([72.163.43.39]) by XMB-RCD-202.cisco.com ([72.163.62.209]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 11:26:39 +0000
References: <6A0BFABB-225C-4D14-83F5-4398AF0E5CC3@cisco.com> <A2297077-2804-407E-9971-5459F0E39806@townsley.net> <5B6B2B64C9FE2A489045EEEADDAFF2C30444B2D2@XMB-RCD-109.cisco.com> <5B6B2B64C9FE2A489045EEEADDAFF2C30444B2E1@XMB-RCD-109.cisco.com> <3723BC44-931F-4852-88A4-716931770F85@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
From: "Ralph Droms (rdroms)" <rdroms@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis WGLC
Thread-Index: Ac0JsPrYNRsTImQsRYy+n1Sl0ZA++Q==
In-Reply-To: <3723BC44-931F-4852-88A4-716931770F85@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <B5D87268-1B10-41D8-9948-650AFDD0B657@cisco.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 12:26:35 +0100
To: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Mar 2012 11:26:39.0437 (UTC) FILETIME=[FB0BEFD0:01CD09B0]
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org, v6ops-chairs@tools.ietf.org, Ron Bonica <ron@bonica.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis WGLC
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: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 11:26:40 -0000

Fred - not meaning to suggest this topic isn't important...but it's way too nice a day to give the issue the consideration it deserves.   So, I'll post a response, but likely not until tomorrow when I'll be sequestered indoors most of the day, anyway.

- Ralph

On Mar 24, 2012, at 12:17 PM, "Fred Baker" <fred@cisco.com> wrote:

> 
> On Mar 24, 2012, at 10:31 AM, Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote:
> 
>> Further, isn’t draft-townsley-troan-ipv6-ce-transitioning-02 specifying technology or is there another document that covers the technology in more detail?  Technology documents need to move to a different WG. 
> 
> I'm reading your statement above, and in other email reading statements by someone using the same email address that go into some detail on the implications of binary flags in messages. I'm wondering where the line is drawn and why one draws it.
> 
> I have asked a selection of ADs and WG Chairs to weigh in on where the document should be discussed; if someone comes back to Joel and I with "this obviously belongs in <>", we'll send it there or send the relevant subset there. Personally, I think it falls within the charter of operational procedures used in IPv6 networks.
> 
> Where I draw the line on the normative reference that Ole and Mark would like is how well baked the proposed procedures are. We will determine that Monday.
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email