[v6ops] Working Group Status

"Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com> Thu, 23 January 2014 17:59 UTC

Return-Path: <fred@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E20DF1A0040 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 09:59:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.036
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i1xLLBSLWJwz for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 09:59:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 601581A002F for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 09:59:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3132; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1390499986; x=1391709586; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=3euAbA34e1TGqOFbkQ4NOUHkiPh9JQV1s443mLb49pE=; b=eqvGdzGyeTnlBs5GB3sVRzVgoZbMvIgfOGCp+CF110M4XXWt0h1bLder PCRFynFRIo4EQDDyEGlbYu3rRk1KaJjCRDI2lzTGYvMcHPYKtwwKv6nN6 H6Yi2caKRUDRaHrL3MS9kJmvsCtWX+3hcfK744NFiUsOFU//DjgbzBlZl k=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 195
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AggFADhY4VKtJXHA/2dsb2JhbABbgwyBDr0OFnSCLB1ICR0BgQAnBCGHd5peqyYXkiuBFASQPIExhjaSGIMtgio
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.95,707,1384300800"; d="asc'?scan'208"; a="15038881"
Received: from rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com ([173.37.113.192]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 23 Jan 2014 17:59:46 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x03.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x03.cisco.com [173.37.183.77]) by rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s0NHxkrI031224 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 17:59:46 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([169.254.9.230]) by xhc-rcd-x03.cisco.com ([173.37.183.77]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:59:46 -0600
From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
To: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Working Group Status
Thread-Index: AQHPGGTm0UsVQXrYY0WE6tEAI/rUtw==
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 17:59:45 +0000
Message-ID: <B5E65628-40C2-44FC-AE9E-C01FB85BD475@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.19.64.117]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_8462964B-0A54-4CB6-9109-817FD2E898AA"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [v6ops] Working Group Status
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 17:59:52 -0000

I'm thinking through possible agendas for IETF 89. The following is where we stand. John is working through the two drafts that have completed WGLC. 

As we have over the past several years, we have two requirements for a draft to be on the f2f agenda: it must be posted or updated since the previous IETF meeting, and it must have supportive discussion on the mailing list. I assume that working group drafts (draft-ietf-v6ops-*) have interest, and if they have been updated include them regardless. Individual submissions (draft-name-v6ops-*) come and go.

Consider this a call for new or updated drafts, and for discussion of those drafts.

RFC Ed Queue: MISSREF
    Mar 18  draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-multihoming-without-ipv6nat

I have commented to the authors on the process of unsticking this draft, which I think will require some level of revision.

RFC Ed Queue: AUTH48
    Nov 14  draft-ietf-v6ops-ra-guard-implementation

IESG:
    Jan 13  draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience

Completed WGLC:
    Oct  6  draft-ietf-v6ops-64share
    Jan 12  draft-ietf-v6ops-enterprise-incremental-ipv6

Working Group Document updated since IETF:
    Nov 26  draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem
    Dec  6  draft-ietf-v6ops-balanced-ipv6-security
    Jan 13  draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-roaming-analysis

Individual Submission to v6ops updated since IETF:
    Nov  4  draft-chen-v6ops-ipv6-roaming-analysis
    Dec  3  draft-taylor-v6ops-fragdrop
    Dec 24  draft-liu-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-guidance
    Dec 28  draft-byrne-v6ops-clatip
    Jan 11  draft-osamu-v6ops-ipv4-literal-in-url

Working Group Document NOT updated since IETF:
    Aug 13  draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6
    Aug 14  draft-ietf-v6ops-monitor-ds-ipv6
    Sep 10  draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile
    Oct 21  draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations

Individual Submission to v6ops NOT updated since IETF:
    Jul 30  draft-smith-v6ops-ce-dhcpv6-transparency
    Oct  3  draft-elkins-v6ops-ipv6-end-to-end-rt-needed
    Oct  3  draft-elkins-v6ops-ipv6-packet-sequence-needed
    Oct  3  draft-elkins-v6ops-ipv6-pdm-recommended-usage
    Oct 18  draft-ma-v6ops-router-test
    Oct 21  draft-liu-bonica-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem
    Oct 21  draft-moreiras-v6ops-rfc3849bis
    Oct 21  draft-rafiee-v6ops-iid-lifetime
    Oct 21  draft-sun-v6ops-openv6-address-pool-management
    Oct 21  draft-yang-v6ops-ipv6tran-select