IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Agenda call

Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com> Thu, 08 October 2009 01:39 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED7893A687A for <ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:39:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.133
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.133 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.638, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 9jq4EFukP7he for <ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:39:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D86BA3A67F1 for <v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:39:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org>) id 1Mvhuk-000MAy-Ti for v6ops-data0@psg.com; Thu, 08 Oct 2009 01:35:30 +0000
Received: from [171.71.176.117] (helo=sj-iport-6.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <fred@cisco.com>) id 1Mvhub-000M9n-65 for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Oct 2009 01:35:28 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=fred@cisco.com; l=790; q=dns/txt; s=sjiport06001; t=1254965721; x=1256175321; h=from:sender:reply-to:subject:date:message-id:to:cc: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-id: content-description:resent-date:resent-from:resent-sender: resent-to:resent-cc:resent-message-id:in-reply-to: references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:list-owner:list-archive; z=From:=20Fred=20Baker=20<fred@cisco.com>|Subject:=20Re: =20Agenda=20call|Date:=20Wed,=207=20Oct=202009=2018:20:33 =20-0700|Message-Id:=20<27A1609E-5988-41DB-A930-2ABB2EE26 1FB@cisco.com>|To:=20IPv6=20Operations=20<v6ops@ops.ietf. org>|Mime-Version:=201.0=20(Apple=20Message=20framework =20v936)|Content-Transfer-Encoding:=207bit|In-Reply-To: =20<4ACD0BD3.4080705@gmail.com>|References:=20<E0A33250-B 378-4CC4-AAFD-5045E60CFF03@cisco.com>=20<4ACD0BD3.4080705 @gmail.com>; bh=/bpi2MhubSODXpmrdfXeqr4zkLjjAcm/t5BUBbT4Im0=; b=LnKGmOUGy35pH6Oa4n4b1nplUvbkW6NjCjI/0ru+E0p3OI5Hbf8cs7GC ugsNJRvbvhixoUT1VqeYlO3KbyRMfKsT1xjZ51qT7uLUcTbCSbq3iQ4Fr xzR8ZwKmTtVi29hMISVKYxi/ayj03OAdaK+Bt3DWH5Ivi4p/kxOYSdxXP 8=;
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=pass (signature verified [TEST]) header.i=fred@cisco.com
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAOnezEqrR7MV/2dsb2JhbADAEIhjAY83BoQq
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.44,522,1249257600"; d="scan'208";a="404214763"
Received: from sj-dkim-1.cisco.com ([171.71.179.21]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Oct 2009 01:20:36 +0000
Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n981Ka4j018915 for <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:20:36 -0700
Received: from stealth-10-32-244-218.cisco.com (stealth-10-32-244-218.cisco.com [10.32.244.218]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n981KaXH012755 for <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Oct 2009 01:20:36 GMT
Message-Id: <27A1609E-5988-41DB-A930-2ABB2EE261FB@cisco.com>
From: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
To: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <4ACD0BD3.4080705@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936)
Subject: Re: Agenda call
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 18:20:33 -0700
References: <E0A33250-B378-4CC4-AAFD-5045E60CFF03@cisco.com> <4ACD0BD3.4080705@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=790; t=1254964836; x=1255828836; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim1004; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=fred@cisco.com; z=From:=20Fred=20Baker=20<fred@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20Agenda=20call |Sender:=20; bh=/bpi2MhubSODXpmrdfXeqr4zkLjjAcm/t5BUBbT4Im0=; b=DaqRLi8977oBSqBVovYfyHeQa1yx6mwQnUAe+Al4c7DhjSMES3rS7AE5sr o7VzZjsBwYiIyY2eLfi52EV1INHJ1fVcKHFWOVJznV/Ozk/z4JlqFsUTB1vP QFwaZS0lPVEMqJwCIqNA3gzY8LHLSvEHW631cY6V/aDBTZS+EjCE4=;
Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <v6ops.ops.ietf.org>

The authors wanted to ask about this at the last IETF meeting, and the  
discussion around the document told me that it wasn't ready for  
working group status.

Opinions at this point? Does this document represent something the  
working group wants to take on?



On Oct 7, 2009, at 2:44 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

> I'm not sure if Sheng is back on line, so let me say
> that we want to propose WG adoption of
> draft-jiang-v6ops-incremental-cgn-03.txt
>
> It's been updated according to comments received by
> September 25. We could describe those updates in a short
> agenda slot.
>
>   Brian
>
> On 2009-10-08 04:54, Fred Baker wrote:
>> We have two sessions scheduled in Hiroshima. This is a call for  
>> agenda
>> items. Who wants time to talk?
>>
>>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email