IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6tc] Re: Tunneling and Transition Drafts

Jerome Durand <jdurand@renater.fr> Wed, 06 April 2005 14:06 UTC

Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA14479; Wed, 6 Apr 2005 10:06:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DJBJb-000058-Vq; Wed, 06 Apr 2005 10:15:32 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DJB6h-0005lB-1Q; Wed, 06 Apr 2005 10:02:11 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DJB6f-0005k1-2G for v6tc@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Apr 2005 10:02:09 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA13603 for <v6tc@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Apr 2005 10:02:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mail1.renater.fr ([193.49.159.8]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DJBEz-0008Ne-Vx for v6tc@ietf.org; Wed, 06 Apr 2005 10:10:47 -0400
Received: from [193.49.159.162] (helo=[193.49.159.162]) by mail1.renater.fr with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DJB6C-0001s5-Q0; Wed, 06 Apr 2005 16:01:42 +0200
Message-ID: <4253EBCF.8030800@renater.fr>
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 16:01:51 +0200
From: Jerome Durand <jdurand@renater.fr>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040910
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
Subject: Re: [v6tc] Re: Tunneling and Transition Drafts
References: <BE78FA5D.F1CA3%jordi.palet@consulintel.es> <425395F8.50501@renater.fr> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0504061057570.11494@netcore.fi>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0504061057570.11494@netcore.fi>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "mail1.renater.fr", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see postmaster@renater.fr for details. Content preview: Well, on my notes I have the question Alain asked at the end that was: "Who would be happy if TC just take TSP and make it an RFC?" You don't mention this question that had a large majority of yes. Then I would be happy to get the "official" minutes as well :) [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++)
X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "v6ops@ops.ietf.org" <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>, "v6tc@ietf.org" <v6tc@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: v6tc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6tc.ietf.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6tc>, <mailto:v6tc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/v6tc>
List-Post: <mailto:v6tc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6tc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6tc>, <mailto:v6tc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: v6tc-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: v6tc-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++)
X-Scan-Signature: 7baded97d9887f7a0c7e8a33c2e3ea1b
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Well, on my notes I have the question Alain asked at the end that was: 
"Who would be happy if TC just take TSP and make it an RFC?" You don't 
mention this question that had a large majority of yes. Then I would be 
happy to get the "official" minutes as well :)

Jerome



Pekka Savola wrote:

> On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, Jerome Durand wrote:
> 
>>>> Opinions?
>>
>>
>> I am not sure I share the view that the BOF was a non-event. There was 
>> an agreement from a *large majority* of people in the room to say that 
>> the WG should take TSP that fulfills all requirements presented, and 
>> make it a standard. Now I guess it's time to move on in that direction.
> 
> 
> It will be interesting to see BoF minutes, because I didn't see large 
> majority.  For what it's worth, my recollection was:
> 
> I saw less than about 5-10 people supporting TSP.
> I saw less than about 5-10 people supporting doing something new.
> I saw less than about 5-10 people being comfortable with existing
>   mechanisms (like L2TP).
> 
> Bottom line is that if we don't need to care about the RTT and overhead 
> concerns at all, I can't clearly see real benefits for TSP instead of 
> just using L2TP.
> 


_______________________________________________
v6tc mailing list
v6tc@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6tc

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email