Re: [v6ops] My read of the data

"Gunter Van de Velde (gvandeve)" <gvandeve@cisco.com> Tue, 30 November 2010 10:40 UTC

Return-Path: <gvandeve@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BD113A6C5B for <v6ops@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 02:40:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.394
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.394 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.605, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 uzMThfjCaNUX for <v6ops@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 02:40:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CF383A6A0C for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 02:39:41 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-2.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AlkDAANk9EyrR7H+/2dsb2JhbACUQY5KcaZem1mFRwSNdg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,279,1288569600"; d="scan'208";a="294437162"
Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com ([171.71.177.254]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 Nov 2010 10:40:49 +0000
Received: from xbh-ams-101.cisco.com (xbh-ams-101.cisco.com [144.254.74.71]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oAUAeekI000224; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 10:40:49 GMT
Received: from xmb-ams-101.cisco.com ([144.254.74.76]) by xbh-ams-101.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 30 Nov 2010 11:40:36 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 11:40:35 +0100
Message-ID: <4269EA985EACD24987D82DAE2FEC62E502ADC8BA@XMB-AMS-101.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4CF404F2.1090401@bogus.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] My read of the data
Thread-Index: AcuP/36SM5s6IyJ6Sju5Gcp19G5+DQAepr0A
References: <F9BB4F42-376F-4AD3-A195-F45AFA52CB15@cisco.com> <4CF404F2.1090401@bogus.com>
From: "Gunter Van de Velde (gvandeve)" <gvandeve@cisco.com>
To: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>, "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Nov 2010 10:40:36.0128 (UTC) FILETIME=[05B47200:01CB907B]
Cc: IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] My read of the data
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 10:41:05 -0000

I think there was a degree of understanding that the Harmfull-tunnels
draft made good progress.
Maybe some words on recommendations on how to minimalize the harmfulness
(assuming that 
word exists :-) ) was recommended.

Nevertheless, my feeling during the v6ops was that this draft has
usefulness and will 
help the Internet become a better operational environment.

The survey-monkey indicated some people to give feedback to the list.
Didn't see it 
yet (but it could be due to my backlog). 

G/

-----Original Message-----
From: v6ops-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Joel Jaeggli
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 8:54 PM
To: Fred Baker (fred)
Cc: IPv6 Ops WG
Subject: Re: [v6ops] My read of the data

To close since it's monday the 29th discussion indicates that the below
drafts:

	draft-carpenter-v4v6tran-framework

	draft-wing-v6ops-happy-eyeballs-ipv6

	draft-wbeebee-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-bis with edits from
	draft-herbst-v6ops-cpeenhancements

	draft-livingood-dns-whitelisting-implications

plus

	draft-troan-multihoming-without-nat66

were not controversial as working groups documents.

consesus remains divided on the value of

	draft-sarikaya-v6ops-prefix-delegation

as a WG document, suggestions for improvement or advancement along an
alternative track if desired should be made.

If there's any-other input on this subject please post it now, or
consider the subject closed for the time-being.

thanks.

joel

On 11/20/10 11:12 AM, Fred Baker wrote:
> The documents that I gather the working groups wants to accept as
working group documents (>60%) are:
> 
> Consider this a "hum". Do you buy this?
> 
> 	draft-carpenter-v4v6tran-framework
> 	draft-wing-v6ops-happy-eyeballs-ipv6
> 	draft-wbeebee-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-bis with edits from
draft-herbst-v6ops-cpeenhancements
> 	draft-livingood-dns-whitelisting-implications
> 
> Could do mine too, but I plan to let it die unless people realy want
it. The important ones are happy eyeballs, the test I took to bmwg, and
Gont's RFC
> 
> The chairs will take the rest of the drafts up with their respective
authors to decide on the appropriate way forward.
> 
> I will be on vacation this week and therefore slow. Expect me on email
after 29 November.
> _______________________________________________
> 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