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

On Mar 24, 2012, at 12:40 PM, Ralph Droms (rdroms) wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 24, 2012, at 12:33 PM, "Mark Townsley" <mark@townsley.net> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Mar 24, 2012, at 12:26 PM, Ralph Droms (rdroms) wrote:
>> 
>>> it's way too nice a day to give the issue the consideration it deserves.   
>> 
>> Enjoy Spring in Paris, Ralph. Wish I was :-)
> 
> The weather is a little better than when I was here for the IPv6 World Congress…

Yes, that was embarrassing. We're trying to make up for it. 

> 
>> 
>>> So, I'll post a response, but likely not until tomorrow when I'll be sequestered indoors most of the day, anyway.
>> 
>> FWIW, it seem the chairs have given airtime for us to talk about this Monday morning if you want to wait until you have heard the real-time part of the discussion.
> 
> Why do I need to hear all the data before giving an opinion?

No comment.

- Mark

> 
> - Ralph
> 
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> - 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
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> v6ops mailing list
>>> v6ops@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>> 