Re: [v6ops] Drafts lodged against the deadline.

["Fred Baker (fred)" <[e-mail]>]

Thanks, Joel.

At this point, Lee and I have not decided what the agenda will contain. Let me give you my current thoughts; list discussion and Lee’s viewpoint when we talk will be important here.

On Jul 7, 2014, at 9:05 AM, joel jaeggli <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Greetings,
> 
> just a helpful reminder to folks who submitted documents right up
> against the submission deadline. It is incumbent on you the authors to
> draw our attention to those so that they may be discussed properly prior
> to the meeting itself and agenda time can be allocated or not as necessary.
> 
> thanks
> joel

The drafts break out this way:

IESG:

    Jan 12  draft-ietf-v6ops-enterprise-incremental-ipv6
            Approved-announcement to be sent::Revised I-D Needed
    Jun 11  draft-ietf-v6ops-clatip
            Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed

Working Group Document updated since IETF 89:

    Mar  6  draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices
    Mar 11  draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile
    Jun 18  draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem
    Jul  4  draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-roaming-analysis
    Jul  4  draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations

Individual Submission updated since IETF 89:

    Apr  7  draft-smith-v6ops-mitigate-rtr-dos-mld-slctd-node
    Jul  1  draft-kitamura-ipv6-zoneid-free
    Jul  3  draft-jaeggli-v6ops-pmtud-ecmp-problem
    Jul  3  draft-liu-v6ops-running-multiple-prefixes
    Jul  3  draft-wang-v6ops-flow-label-refelction
    Jul  4  draft-sun-v6ops-xlat-multi
    Jul  4  draft-yourtchenko-chown-rupik-v6ops-dad-3x

Working Group Document NOT updated since IETF 89:

    Feb  4  draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6

Individual Submission NOT updated since IETF 89:

    Jan 11  draft-osamu-v6ops-ipv4-literal-in-url
    Feb 13  draft-cui-v6ops-lte-lw4over6
    Feb 14  draft-foo-v6ops-6rdmtu
    Feb 14  draft-liu-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-guidance

To my way of thinking, draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices (which was posted just before the working group meeting in London) was discussed then, and draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile is still working out the last call comments from last September. So among the working group drafts, the ones on the table this time include draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem, draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-roaming-analysis, and draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations.

Similarly, to my way of thinking, while draft-smith-v6ops-mitigate-rtr-dos-mld-slctd-node is appealing, v6ops comments raised concerns about the reliability of MLD (and MLD implementations) in the context. That sounds like an issue for 6man, not v6ops. 

draft-kitamura-ipv6-zoneid-free and draft-jaeggli-v6ops-pmtud-ecmp-problem have had supportive discussion on the list, so they seem likely. 

I’m looking for list discussion of draft-liu-v6ops-running-multiple-prefixes, draft-wang-v6ops-flow-label-refelction, draft-sun-v6ops-xlat-multi, and draft-yourtchenko-chown-rupik-v6ops-dad-3x.

Opinions welcome. As always.