[v6ops] Planning for IETF 110

Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 08 December 2020 20:43 UTC

Return-Path: <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 217973A116E for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 12:43:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.087
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.087 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_HTML_ATTACH=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 fuqNt3TOdmnU for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 12:43:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf1-x42e.google.com (mail-pf1-x42e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43FC03A1158 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 12:43:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf1-x42e.google.com with SMTP id s21so15030005pfu.13 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 12:43:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:mime-version:date:subject:cc:to:message-id; bh=4hz5KV5jz8sZ8zj32931SiLCSsd/kHQGennZzmq2BDM=; b=HEG2MWWykasvuQMoHG6lr9kD5jrnXt1LPPPIO2N7p1Pl5ROVNirsoq9HGGT4uTRcP1 W30wTrAyR6KmkoG8wdy+tjh0v/+8YdXUWAsEzdcGqaYh5eOk2ApVwwhJULGOJPbt5tO7 kcEdE1WeYDY2c8lwnkPCPD2dENf14Us56z/CkLrW6gYIJCfMUZyCt2oP2/OL2/WdY1pW d8ZlXlGSjQ5af1BJiilAZi5DA7jMJNdVUVR8xYSJjtKcMqnH5na8Nwzw3UowifAjCkaw hZ5b8MvmCfxxdbcrfqrjBirve0v3v4k7PPMatogQBA3VDv/P6ELEahSfCdRl2WW9nPDJ S1wA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:date:subject:cc:to:message-id; bh=4hz5KV5jz8sZ8zj32931SiLCSsd/kHQGennZzmq2BDM=; b=I9V2MReVkKZjH9QRBqhH9StrjS9aCgCncGJNow8xYk4WyzqIaFqeSPGdnx/wR/5n+7 3Q9pjdM6bZf3KNEpD+gwGAlJv7C3xNKaATtKDJjpa9CvNE+tHoIcnpRmjW+1BnxNHgMv ij+0AubCPAKU6HTQfQkJ3DCB5Vz6bfnPHI9HDpNF6b/oJTu+1l0N/RsEm/gg7zl1KEYA uaMqWB2+pDZI2LZMijJszZ1JVxrnnR1TULBM+h5DZm6pyvthPEbR0cZQBqhR7YhbQEIy zzLbxO8fTqlmleX6e0IaJ93JRcV3FlJGQJz65w2yleoGebO5vZtNLF6y5FOeOiZUnb9L DfmQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531O0zZRI4239bveIraZoCx3D4+94qY7d0fVQxG9TMELu6HaJvKg yJGCiR6760Ib851R4Yg2lmN8CZOk2hxoslJa
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz6lDAI8d8NBmTpDJfo3LceSZ9QBahu22q+dUXZCs9LdfJkPxfWCEEtheH6rkqEY/x5NqlqUQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:e90e:: with SMTP id i14mr24863918pgh.298.1607460199477; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 12:43:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.10] (ip72-205-75-17.sb.sd.cox.net. [72.205.75.17]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z7sm8583024pgz.43.2020.12.08.12.43.16 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 08 Dec 2020 12:43:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C70E5F9A-C12B-4EC1-BB49-1B4CC272E0A6"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.40.0.2.31\))
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 12:43:15 -0800
To: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <468FFA00-099E-4E0B-ABCB-C2CB2E82577C@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.40.0.2.31)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/rFE2o-121izqVo1QbzruAKydFnk>
Subject: [v6ops] Planning for IETF 110
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 08 Dec 2020 20:43:22 -0000

I have requested two 120 minute sessions at IETF 110; we wound up being very rushed at IETF 109, so I'm leaving some extra room on the assumption that we can cancel one if we don't need it. It is my understanding that IETF 110 will again be virtual, although I can hope for a f2f meeting in San Francisco for IETF 111. I have attached the current state of play in v6ops, which Ron and I use in planning an agenda. I list working group drafts and individual submissions as updated or unupdated since IETF 108, 31 July 2020 - if it has not been updated, I don't consider it an active draft. I would usually date that from the previous IETF meeting, but this seems sensible at the moment.

We have five comment periods scheduled post-IETF-109, working around holidays. We will likely have one or two WGLCs in February, to move work along that seem to have reached consensus; to that end, as Ron invites discussion, I'd appreciate it if people take it upon themselves to do a thorough review of each such draft and post it to the list. I'd like to believe that we will have new drafts in December or January that we can discuss in email and potentially discuss at IETF 110.