Re: [v6ops] New drafts

Hi Ole,

Let me explain how this started.

Long time ago, I asked in the list to the authors to work on this. As I got no answer, I asked the authors writing them to the emails in the RFC copied the chairs and ADs.

I asked them several times, even during the Seoul meeting I asked to meet there. I never got an answer. I never understood that attitude, I think is really impolite. I always answer my emails … and even more if those are questions related to the IETF work.

So, I asked the chairs about how to proceed, they suggested me to ask the RFC editor for the XML file and take over that work. I’ve never been in that situation, but I checked similar situations and saw that the authors get replaced and there is some text recognizing them.

In fact, this is the same situation in between you as co-author of RFC6204 and RFC7084, right?

I guess it is related to the need to avoid the need for each “older” author to ack when a new version is uploaded, right?

I’m not feeling there is anything wrong, so if I’m wrong, please explain it, and fine to change whatever is needed, as usual.

I guess you’re referring anyway to the authors of the actual –bis which is a WG item or even those that I have submitted last week removing the transition stuff, because if you look at the content of the one for the transition it is probably over 90% new, right?

If you have any suggestions about the HNCP part, or how to approach the transition, please let us know. For the transition, I suggested moving to MUST at least for some of them when I started this work, but the list didn’t liked that idea. I also think if we do that, we should also have almost everything as MUST in the 7084-bis (w/o the transition).

Regards,
Jordi

-----Mensaje original-----
De: v6ops <v6ops-bounces@ietf.org> en nombre de <otroan@employees.org>
Responder a: <otroan@employees.org>
Fecha: viernes, 16 de junio de 2017, 8:34
Para: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
CC: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Asunto: Re: [v6ops] New drafts

    > We have several new drafts that the chairs would like working group discussion on, if only to gauge interest. Jen sent a note regarding hers a moment ago. Jordi has, following feedback, divided 70844bis, and we are looking for commentary on each.
    > 
    > 	2017-06-14	draft-linkova-v6ops-conditional-ras
    > 	2017-06-12	draft-palet-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-transition
    > 	2017-06-11	draft-palet-v6ops-rfc7084-bis2
    > 	2017-06-11	draft-palet-v6ops-rfc7084-bis4-hncp
    > 
    > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc7084-bis
    >  "Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers", Jordi Palet,
    >  2017-06-12
    > 
    > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-palet-v6ops-rfc7084-bis-transition
    >  "Transition Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers", Jordi Palet,
    >  2017-06-12
    > 
    > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-palet-v6ops-rfc7084-bis2
    >  "Minimum Requirements for IPv6-only Customer Edge Routers", Jordi Palet,
    >  2017-06-11
    > 
    > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-palet-v6ops-rfc7084-bis4-hncp
    >  "Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers with HNCP", Jordi Palet,
    >  2017-06-11

    I would prefer to see two IPv6 CE documents.
    One updated 7084 with HNCP requirements and the transition mechanisms taken out.
    One only for the transition mechanisms. Although that might have some overlap with draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe

    The first is closest to Jordi's rfc7084-bis4-hncp (although there are not HNCP requirements there yet).
    The second rfc7084-bis-transition. Although I have issues with the approach of recommending all options and not making a choice. When the IETF leaves it to the market to decide, because it cannot reach consensus, then we should consider that, given this is the closest thing we have to a "recommendations to the market" style document.

    I also have issues with the author of these documents replacing the original author set with himself in the documents.

    Cheers,
    Ole
    _______________________________________________
    v6ops mailing list
    v6ops@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.