IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Checking an outcome on the list

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Thu, 07 November 2013 23:39 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@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 D765521E8194 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 15:39:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.251
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.251 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.252, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6OMR+VZnharU for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 15:39:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-bk0-x229.google.com (mail-bk0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4008:c01::229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C81611E817A for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 15:39:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-bk0-f41.google.com with SMTP id na10so602269bkb.0 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 07 Nov 2013 15:39:08 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=1WUp19CUHRmJ4bm5+PW1Xcn2R/QSY+K2vKdc/R6zS8g=; b=OiBrRAz4LYUgqQ4y03unh0OUtH17xNC/VIXo4FWT2zlWZi8k4FYDPMwz0W+YhXHFuc kXaaEbFSbiRAnShLLdByI6uYQE9eeJtoM90Kswg4bJ12b573H9Uk40/br2UHqZGOCDFF 7iULm4vRqIRebVXzbJ0kNyfJcUbC8uxilaBzsC1mdTweu7nOqbmyo4m9KBAZCszzTjGg uf2ekC+vaxKQIxwFxYoN0joZXpWQYwS4wtju/6Mbv1FZgA/5N3mmUOBmbScc2gPTXq3r 1ZaM0r/GR7lo7qwf+WnjnJmjbrvOp195C2gXA0nO33+hT9Sxc1VGkyz7S85uNZDuHN2B 7keA==
X-Received: by 10.205.10.200 with SMTP id pb8mr8613400bkb.16.1383867548160; Thu, 07 Nov 2013 15:39:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [31.133.165.38] (dhcp-a526.meeting.ietf.org. [31.133.165.38]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id pu8sm3852278bkb.9.2013.11.07.15.39.06 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 07 Nov 2013 15:39:07 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <527C24A3.40505@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 12:39:15 +1300
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
References: <0D5C911E-5EB3-4F1F-82B1-B2F486AE3E46@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <0D5C911E-5EB3-4F1F-82B1-B2F486AE3E46@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Checking an outcome on the list
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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, 07 Nov 2013 23:39:51 -0000

On 08/11/2013 11:56, Fred Baker (fred) wrote:
> We say we check f2f decisions on the mailing list to ensure that everyone had a chance to speak. Let's do that.
> 
> In IETF 88, we discussed a number of drafts. Of these:
>   - draft-ietf-v6ops-balanced-ipv6-security will start a two week WGLC on Monday morning New Zealand time.

Good choice (of time zone)

>   - draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience appears to have reached closure. We have one additional revision coming, and then will do a 1 week last call, probably early December.
>   - draft-liu-bonica-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem documents what seems to be a real problem. 
>       1) In your opinion, should draft-liu-bonica-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem be adopted as WG draft draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem and matured into a problem statement to present to 6man?

Yes

>       2) In your opinion, should v6ops invite a draft (which we might adopt as a working group draft) that gives current guidance to operators regarding the use of DHCP and SLAAC in their networks?

Assuming you mean "based on current specifications and implementations", yes.

>   - Should draft-chen-v6ops-ipv6-roaming-analysis be adopted as WG draft draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-roaming-analysis?

No objection.

    Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email