Re: Agenda issue

Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com> Thu, 05 March 2009 08:59 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 1BD3628C169 for <ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 00:59:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.434
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.434 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.939, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, RDNS_NONE=0.1, 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 CszKScfPg1B4 for <ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 00:59:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E06B3A67DB for <v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 00:59:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org>) id 1Lf9MZ-0000mC-GT for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:55:31 +0000
Received: from [171.68.10.86] (helo=sj-iport-4.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <fred@cisco.com>) id 1Lf9MU-0000lE-KB for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:55:28 +0000
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,305,1233532800"; d="scan'208";a="30983389"
Received: from sj-dkim-2.cisco.com ([171.71.179.186]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Mar 2009 08:55:24 +0000
Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n258tO46004003; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 00:55:24 -0800
Received: from xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-221.cisco.com [128.107.191.63]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n258tOm2019601; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 08:55:24 GMT
Received: from xfe-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.174]) by xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 5 Mar 2009 00:55:24 -0800
Received: from [172.17.187.241] ([10.21.124.175]) by xfe-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 5 Mar 2009 00:55:24 -0800
Cc: 'IPv6 Operations' <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>, 'Brian Carpenter' <brian@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
Message-Id: <7FAE1435-0FE1-4C23-B8BF-151D58AF5341@cisco.com>
From: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
To: Sheng Jiang <shengjiang@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <01b701c99d3e$89e1f570$db0c6f0a@china.huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3)
Subject: Re: Agenda issue
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:55:22 -0800
References: <01b701c99d3e$89e1f570$db0c6f0a@china.huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Mar 2009 08:55:24.0368 (UTC) FILETIME=[1F4B0D00:01C99D70]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2514; t=1236243324; x=1237107324; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim2002; 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=20Agenda=20issue |Sender:=20; bh=nCclVKkzU3GuMi5GQ5HTtBPSEl4E0ij9hz1mt1w8Kc4=; b=VAoofaNieWtZKnfMvDcrVSLpDZ2hN0ilAkGLrDZCQDKfMQfKpW13mt4TbV FSgG3gSGMfEv71Ibj7i0manKZflsPqNa8Zt15B+7ezqszSYVVHQ8Gu/oczwg 0Y1PRv0v0D;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-2; header.From=fred@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim2002 verified; );
Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <v6ops.ops.ietf.org>

OK. I truly wish you had put the working group moniker in the draft  
name (individual submission to a named working group), as it is hard  
to keep track of work in a working group with individual submission  
names.

On Mar 4, 2009, at 7:00 PM, Sheng Jiang wrote:

> Hi, Fred,
>
> We have submitted a new draft, draft-jiang-incremental-CGN-00. I  
> think we are
> already on the vows agenda. Are we? If no yet, please count us in.  
> Thanks.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Sheng
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org
>> [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Fred Baker
>> Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 10:16 AM
>> To: IPv6 Operations
>> Subject: Agenda issue
>>
>> I have gotten a number of folks asking for time on the agenda, but I
>> have a problem:
>>
>>
>> -rw-rw-r--  1 fred  fred   19268 Sep 10 05:33 draft-ietf-v6ops-ra-
>> guard-01.txt
>> -rw-rw-r--  1 fred  fred   61870 Sep 29 08:52 draft-miyata-v6ops-
>> snatpt-02.txt
>> -rw-rw-r--  1 fred  fred   48468 Oct  1 10:58 draft-endo-v6ops-
>> dnsproxy-01.txt
>> -rw-rw-r--  1 fred  fred   43841 Oct 15 10:48 draft-ietf-v6ops- 
>> tunnel-
>> security-concerns-
>> 01.txt
>> -rw-rw-r--  1 fred  fred   18562 Oct 15 10:48 draft-krishnan-v6ops-
>> teredo-update-04.txt
>> -rw-rw-r--  1 fred  fred   53090 Oct 30 10:22 draft-wbeebee-ipv6-cpe-
>> router-03.txt
>> -rw-rw-r--  1 fred  fred   36662 Nov  3 10:15 draft-bajko-v6ops-port-
>> restricted-ipaddr-a
>> ssign-02.txt
>> -rw-rw-r--  1 fred  fred   48973 Nov  3 11:06 draft-luo-v6ops-6man-
>> shim6-lbam-00.txt
>> -rw-rw-r--  1 fred  fred   30429 Nov  3 14:26 draft-chown-v6ops- 
>> rogue-
>> ra-02.txt
>> -rw-rw-r--  1 fred  fred  134587 Nov  3 16:14
>> draft-thaler-v6ops- teredo-extensions-02.tx t
>> -rw-rw-r--  1 fred  fred   16462 Feb 17 14:52 draft-rgaglian-v6ops-
>> v6inixp-01.txt
>> -rw-rw-r--  1 fred  fred    9716 Feb 18 08:01 draft-denis-v6ops-nat-
>> addrsel-00.txt
>> -rw-rw-r--  1 fred  fred   41369 Feb 23 22:05 draft-bnss-v6ops-
>> upnp-00.txt
>> -rw-rw-r--  1 fred  fred   19211 Mar  4 14:11 draft-vyncke-vdv-v6ops-
>> conf-stats-00.txt
>>
>>
>> I see four new drafts post-Minneapolis. The Rogue RA and Teredo  
>> drafts,
>> whose last call completed several months ago and the write-up is
>> awaiting new drafts, don't have new drafts.
>>
>> Hello? Anyone out there? I need new drafts (cut-off date is Friday)  
>> for
>> anything folks expect to discuss in the WG meeting...
>>
>