From trac+netext@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Jan 2 11:53:30 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE1B821F8890 for ; Wed, 2 Jan 2013 11:53:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.499 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QczS3j9nWFRk for ; Wed, 2 Jan 2013 11:53:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6217121F888E for ; Wed, 2 Jan 2013 11:53:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55985 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TqUNR-00041C-53; Wed, 02 Jan 2013 20:53:25 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "netext issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software To: sarikaya@ieee.org X-Trac-Project: netext Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 19:53:25 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/netext/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/netext/trac/ticket/19 Message-ID: <058.bcc117d55633f322db3cf82014276600@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 19 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: sarikaya@ieee.org, netext@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+netext@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] #19: Issue in using BID from RFC 5648 X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 19:53:31 -0000 #19: Issue in using BID from RFC 5648 In the draft, BID is mentioned many times: Fig. 3 & Fig. 5 show BID values 1 from MAG1 and 2 from MAG2. BID is mainly defined in RFC 5648 for multiple-interfaced mobile nodes with Mobile IPv6 functionalities. The BID is an identification number used to distinguish multiple bindings REGISTERED BY the MOBILE NODE. Each BID is GENERATED and MANAGED by a MOBILE NODE in Mobile IPv6. In Proxy Mobile IPv6, MOBILITY MANAGEMENT of MOBILE NODES WITH MULTIPLE INTERFACES IS RUN in DIFFERENT INDEPENDENT MAGs. Each MAG sees only one interface. Because of all these reasons, BID loses its meaning. In the draft, Sec. 5.1, it says that BID is assigned and used by the local mobility anchor. It is not explained why LMA would need BID in searching the binding cache for flows? Remember that RFC 5648 is not about flow mobility, so RFC 5648 assumes a single entry for each interface of MN in the binding cache. -- --------------------------------+---------------------------------------- Reporter: sarikaya@ieee.org | Owner: sarikaya@ieee.org Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: milestone1 Component: pmipv6-flowmob | Version: 2.0 Severity: Active WG Document | Keywords: BID, PMIPv6, flow mobility --------------------------------+---------------------------------------- Ticket URL: netext From brian@innovationslab.net Fri Jan 4 04:44:49 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7842021F88E8; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 04:44:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HbEG-VIV9p9r; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 04:44:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from uillean.fuaim.com (uillean.fuaim.com [206.197.161.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8781121F88CB; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 04:44:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from clairseach.fuaim.com (clairseach-high.fuaim.com [206.197.161.158]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by uillean.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AE1F880A0; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 04:44:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from clemson.local (nat-gwifi.jhuapl.edu [128.244.87.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clairseach.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17D2A130019; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 04:44:47 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <50E6CEC1.1050805@innovationslab.net> Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 07:44:49 -0500 From: Brian Haberman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dmm@ietf.org, mip4@ietf.org, "netext@ietf.org" References: <93720FE55DA3044C9F74B2962338F7DE8A4E815380@AUSX7MCPC109.AMER.DELL.COM> In-Reply-To: <93720FE55DA3044C9F74B2962338F7DE8A4E815380@AUSX7MCPC109.AMER.DELL.COM> X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <93720FE55DA3044C9F74B2962338F7DE8A4E815380@AUSX7MCPC109.AMER.DELL.COM> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------080508000209070902090105" Subject: [netext] Mobility-related work in the IEEE X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 12:44:49 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080508000209070902090105 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit All, As per the note below, the IEEE has approved the OmniRAN study group. There is potential for significant interactions between OmniRAN and the IETF on mobility-related work. Regards, Brian -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [new-work] Status of Study Groups per November 2012 IEEE 802 Plenary Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 14:48:13 -0600 From: To: Dear Colleagues, The following Study Groups were approved at the November 2012 IEEE 802 Plenary - 1. IEEE 802, "OmniRAN" EC Study Group 2. IEEE 802.1 "802.11 Bridging" Study Group 3. IEEE 802.3 "Reduced Twisted Pair Gigabit Ethernet" Study Group 4. IEEE 802.3 "Next Generation BASE-T" Study Group 5. IEEE 802.3 "Distinguished Minimum Latency Traffic in a Converged Traffic Environment" Study Group 6. IEEE 802.11 "Pre-association Discovery (PAD)" Study Group 7. IEEE 802.11 "General Link (GLK)" Study Group 8. IEEE 802.15 "Ultra Low Power" Study Group 9. IEEE 802.15 "Layer 2 Routing" Study Group Please note, per the IEEE 802 LMSC Policies and Procedures that a Study Group is chartered plenary session-to-plenary session. Therefore, the Study Groups, listed above and found at http://www.ieee802.org/StudyGroups.shtml, are chartered until the IEEE 802 March 2013 Plenary Session. Please note that IEEE meetings are open and may be attended by any individuals who register and fulfill any registration fees. Details regarding future IEEE 802 plenary meeting schedules may be found at http://www.ieee802.org/PARs.shtml. Please refer to individual working groups for their interim meeting schedules. A listing of all working groups may be found at http://www.ieee802.org/. Best Regards, John D'Ambrosia IEEE 802 LMSC Recording Secretary Note - This email solely represents the views of the IEEE 802 LMSC and does not necessarily represent a position of the IEEE or the IEEE Standards Association. --------------080508000209070902090105 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; name="Attached Message Part" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Attached Message Part" _______________________________________________ new-work mailing list new-work@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/new-work --------------080508000209070902090105-- From internet-drafts@ietf.org Wed Jan 9 18:01:10 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0866821F854D; Wed, 9 Jan 2013 18:01:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.54 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.54 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.059, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LTpSGjjdDcFE; Wed, 9 Jan 2013 18:01:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE6D021F8541; Wed, 9 Jan 2013 18:01:08 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.37 Message-ID: <20130110020108.16107.40031.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 18:01:08 -0800 Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-08.txt X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 02:01:10 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Network-Based Mobility Extensions Working= Group of the IETF. Title : IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IP= v6 Author(s) : Sri Gundavelli Xingyue Zhou Jouni Korhonen Rajeev Koodli Filename : draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-08.txt Pages : 15 Date : 2013-01-09 Abstract: This specification defines a traffic offload mechanism and a related mobility option for carrying IPv4 Offload traffic selectors between a mobile access gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. Based on the negotiated IPv4 traffic offload flow selectors with the local mobility anchor, a mobile access gateway can enable offload traffic rule on the selected IPv4 flows. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-08 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-08 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From internet-drafts@ietf.org Tue Jan 15 18:13:38 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6840C21F84E3; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:13:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.508 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.508 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.091, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 25kh69fFJPqy; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:13:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 988D721F84BC; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:13:37 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.37 Message-ID: <20130116021337.22615.59843.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:13:37 -0800 Cc: netext@ietf.org Subject: [netext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netext-wifi-epc-eap-attributes-02.txt X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 02:13:38 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Network-Based Mobility Extensions Working= Group of the IETF. Title : EAP Attributes for WiFi - EPC Integration Author(s) : Ravi Valmikam Rajeev Koodli Filename : draft-ietf-netext-wifi-epc-eap-attributes-02.txt Pages : 12 Date : 2013-01-15 Abstract: With WiFi beginning to establishing itself as a trusted access network for service providers, it has become important to provide functions commonly available in 3G and 4G networks in WiFi access networks. Such functions include Access Point Name (APN) Selection, multiple Packet Data Network (PDN) connections and seamless mobility between WiFi and 3G/4G networks. EAP/AKA (and EAP/AKA') is standardized by 3GPP as the access authentication protocol for trusted access networks. This IETF specification is required for mobile devices to access the 3GPP Evolved Packet Core (EPC) networks. This document defines a few new EAP attributes and procedures to provide the above-mentioned functions in trusted WiFi access networks. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netext-wifi-epc-eap-attributes There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netext-wifi-epc-eap-attributes-02 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-netext-wifi-epc-eap-attribute= s-02 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From bpatil1@gmail.com Thu Jan 17 07:16:44 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C91E021F858A for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:16:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mZcCIY6VVL7l for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:16:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ob0-f175.google.com (mail-ob0-f175.google.com [209.85.214.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2372921F8586 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:16:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ob0-f175.google.com with SMTP id vb8so2617013obc.6 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:16:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type; bh=T8XmSCwe0mVNkpgYEuSia9+I+kRHKn0eSRg1KBUWSrs=; b=bft+lpdUPgFTM95hTR67DsS8cASDl87kIgfhVzsK+927+IVaisdWR1MslJGPhUkkOr NuKSwNJA2NWMmOsdMdLMgojYi0vKEpFCFLnQLAeN6zxAFk7IUaY8fhdi+GaPF66ibUam mCmenIXob7KPUCzX+7rbbpq+fUsquzVarDHGpQHlud+CkNFbwKsjWCcbGz6JjYLdXMa0 KFDu4kweKeudoerYc40DWjGIw+LswsJmvRwyOrpaquKC321NTrDQEdZaatDJvklJijYQ dc9Bb5+5yt0bGDuaQ6y+9rfECHYCPlqhle7VWiIeciLvNwypDcfbv7cVCIiAu0uFraPs ny6Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.40.3 with SMTP id t3mr4065393obk.56.1358435803719; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:16:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.76.119.2 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:16:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:16:43 -0600 Message-ID: From: Basavaraj Patil To: netext@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04462bbe87e63904d37d7b4e Cc: netext-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: [netext] Netext WG will not meet at IETF86 X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:16:44 -0000 --f46d04462bbe87e63904d37d7b4e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hello folks, We have been thinking about the WG status and overall progress. Overall, we are making good progress on several documents. However, we think the WG needs to make progress not just at/around meetings. And we do not believe there are any critical issues that need face-face meeting at the upcoming IETF(86). We need people to help review the I-Ds and improve the quality of many of the documents. With this in mind, we have decided that we will not meet at Orlando IETF. Instead, we would like the WG to discuss and resolve any issues over the email alias. We would also like help with I-D reviews. We have discussed this with our AD Brian Haberman (Cc'd) and he is fully supportive of this. Thanks. -Chairs. --f46d04462bbe87e63904d37d7b4e Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello folks,

We have been thinking abo= ut the WG status and overall progress.

Overall, we are making go= od progress on several documents.=A0

However, we think the WG = needs to make progress not just at/around meetings.
And we do not believe there are any critical issues that need face-face mee= ting at the upcoming IETF(86).
We need people to help review the I-Ds and improve the quality of many of t= he documents.=A0

With this in mind, we have decided that we will not meet at Orlando IETF.= =A0
Instead, we would like the= WG to discuss and resolve any issues over the email alias. We would also l= ike help with I-D reviews.=A0

We have discussed this with our AD Brian Haberman (Cc'd) and he is full= y supportive of this.

Thanks.

-Chairs.


--f46d04462bbe87e63904d37d7b4e-- From sgundave@cisco.com Thu Jan 17 18:03:39 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C9BD21F8AE0 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 18:03:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L4mn4GXTDFPF for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 18:03:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A07321F890D for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 18:03:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=7460; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1358474618; x=1359684218; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=ooxkODWAla4h3HKlibtPRqgOQ99nFEEPkTCXbwZxTv4=; b=Csg4Iqhg1VRMigGxfKJJlJuPo5rcWZDmRmHCZ++sPmi/Nu0usAw26S/Z cPjpmbMv/urEykZA+ywi+YXmtuF4e4L1Fh1HQzhXRMBOAg9mvfgEY8T8n WgghcMlEPqWbhBw1FrCfol5l/VMLEz/yauLPnBbGCZdQkYJbud/FawIrT 0=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAFANis+FCtJXG9/2dsb2JhbABFgki7bxZzgh4BAQEEeRIBCA4DAwECCx0oERQJCAIEAQ0FCId/Aw+yaA2IWYwJeINXYQOUNo0NhRKCdYFvNQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,488,1355097600"; d="scan'208,217";a="161187625" Received: from rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com ([173.37.113.189]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Jan 2013 02:03:38 +0000 Received: from xhc-aln-x08.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x08.cisco.com [173.36.12.82]) by rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r0I23bV5029333 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 18 Jan 2013 02:03:37 GMT Received: from xmb-aln-x03.cisco.com ([169.254.6.233]) by xhc-aln-x08.cisco.com ([173.36.12.82]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 20:03:37 -0600 From: "Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" To: Basavaraj Patil , "netext@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [netext] Netext WG will not meet at IETF86 Thread-Index: AQHN9SAGaiwVVRMTxUOoE8psGtQYrw== Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 02:03:36 +0000 Message-ID: <24C0F3E22276D9438D6F366EB89FAEA8100F85D7@xmb-aln-x03.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.3.120616 x-originating-ip: [10.21.126.17] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_24C0F3E22276D9438D6F366EB89FAEA8100F85D7xmbalnx03ciscoc_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "netext-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [netext] Netext WG will not meet at IETF86 X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 02:03:39 -0000 --_000_24C0F3E22276D9438D6F366EB89FAEA8100F85D7xmbalnx03ciscoc_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Raj - Its fine this time. But, taking WG inputs before such conclusion will= help every one in their work planning. We had similar discussion in other= WG's before and the general view was to let the WG participate in such dec= isions and not surprise the group. Also, we miss the meeting, does not mean= we make more progress; out of sight ..out of mind. May be this is also a h= int we may not need that many WG's ..DMM, Multimob, Netext, just a single g= roup, when the work load is less. Any case, Happy New Year !!! Sri From: Basavaraj Patil > Date: Thursday, January 17, 2013 7:16 AM To: "netext@ietf.org" > Cc: "netext-chairs@tools.ietf.org" > Subject: [netext] Netext WG will not meet at IETF86 Hello folks, We have been thinking about the WG status and overall progress. Overall, we are making good progress on several documents. However, we think the WG needs to make progress not just at/around meetings= . And we do not believe there are any critical issues that need face-face mee= ting at the upcoming IETF(86). We need people to help review the I-Ds and improve the quality of many of t= he documents. With this in mind, we have decided that we will not meet at Orlando IETF. Instead, we would like the WG to discuss and resolve any issues over the em= ail alias. We would also like help with I-D reviews. We have discussed this with our AD Brian Haberman (Cc'd) and he is fully su= pportive of this. Thanks. -Chairs. --_000_24C0F3E22276D9438D6F366EB89FAEA8100F85D7xmbalnx03ciscoc_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Raj - Its fine this time. But, taking WG inputs before such conclusion= will help every one in their work planning.  We had similar discussio= n in other WG's before and the general view was to let the WG participate i= n such decisions and not surprise the group. Also, we miss the meeting, does not mean we make more progress; out= of sight ..out of mind. May be this is also a hint we may not need that ma= ny WG's ..DMM, Multimob, Netext, just a single group, when the work load is= less. Any case, Happy New Year !!! 


Sri





From: Basavaraj Patil <bpatil1@gmail.com>
Date: Thursday, January 17, 2013 7:= 16 AM
To: "netext@ietf.org" <= netext@ietf.org>
Cc: "netext-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <netext-chairs@tools.ietf.org&g= t;
Subject: [netext] Netext WG will no= t meet at IETF86


Hello folks,

We have been thinking about the WG status and overall progress.

Overall, we are making good progress on several documents. 

However, we think the WG needs to make progress not just at/around meetings= .
And we do not believe there are any critical issues that need face-face mee= ting at the upcoming IETF(86).
We need people to help review the I-Ds and improve the quality of many of t= he documents. 

With this in mind, we have decided that we will not meet at Orlando IETF.&n= bsp;
Instead, we would like the WG to discuss and resolve any issues over the em= ail alias. We would also like help with I-D reviews. 

We have discussed this with our AD Brian Haberman (Cc'd) and he is fully su= pportive of this.

Thanks.

-Chairs.


 --_000_24C0F3E22276D9438D6F366EB89FAEA8100F85D7xmbalnx03ciscoc_-- From sarikaya2012@gmail.com Fri Jan 18 09:27:01 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: netext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B59CA21F86D5 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 09:27:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.459 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.459 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.139, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KOxWgy3NCNQ4 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 09:27:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-la0-f45.google.com (mail-la0-f45.google.com [209.85.215.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA09921F86D2 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 09:27:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-la0-f45.google.com with SMTP id ep20so4091687lab.4 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 09:26:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=yzXu75VUJgrut6BURv7l22wS24t92sFc7jwLfJriGQY=; b=OlbnlCwScjz+etzg+RbsY/tM868vS08CO3CUzLbgqYjltaS9zjGCE7i6smMRuxSTYm /qayvq+sQQeonwKUCNSQaAhy5ME+qBffMK317U8ss/uVb1J1Uf3sFB+pBjD/u7YgcCAz MH9LIxzjJV1EWWsIhMCFa3I1iPjichYk5pqDT0xdtVSein+x+4/xo0wS/BYu8jWlb1SL rWs9oLafHjhxAc+FTi7m/RPSodoTOBm/uOVi2PxJIRrFpr5YQdaqtRugghj55rF0ZFRf eaPQzDgocTlE1Qaeu3DafBgPPEXbqNKxIi9EPEaZoeGXEw66CM5Bx2oSH1OQAFOqUzGi d96Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.29.229 with SMTP id n5mr4189282lbh.130.1358530019606; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 09:26:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.78.37 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 09:26:59 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 11:26:59 -0600 Message-ID: From: Behcet Sarikaya To: Basavaraj Patil Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0421a78b3c408b04d3936ba4 Cc: netext@ietf.org, netext-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [netext] Netext WG will not meet at IETF86 X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 17:27:01 -0000 --f46d0421a78b3c408b04d3936ba4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Raj, On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Basavaraj Patil wrote: > > Hello folks, > > We have been thinking about the WG status and overall progress. > > Overall, we are making good progress on several documents. > > However, we think the WG needs to make progress not just at/around > meetings. > And we do not believe there are any critical issues that need face-face > meeting at the upcoming IETF(86). > We need people to help review the I-Ds and improve the quality of many of > the documents. > > With this in mind, we have decided that we will not meet at Orlando IETF. > Instead, we would like the WG to discuss and resolve any issues over the > email alias. We would also like help with I-D reviews. > > We have discussed this with our AD Brian Haberman (Cc'd) and he is fully > supportive of this. > > No, not Cc'd :-) Regards, Behcet > Thanks. > > -Chairs. > > > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext > > --f46d0421a78b3c408b04d3936ba4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Raj,

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 9:16 AM, = Basavaraj Patil <bpatil1@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello folks,

We have been thinking about the WG status and overall progr= ess.

Overall, we are making good progress on several documents.= =A0

However, we think the WG needs to make progress not just at= /around meetings.
And we do not believe there are any critical issues that need face-face mee= ting at the upcoming IETF(86).
We need people to help review the I-Ds and improve the quality of many of t= he documents.=A0

With this in mind, we have decided that we will not meet at Orlando IETF.= =A0
Instead, we would like the WG to discuss and resolve any iss= ues over the email alias. We would also like help with I-D reviews.=A0

We have discussed this with our AD Brian Haberman (Cc'd) and he is full= y supportive of this.


No, not Cc= 'd :-)

Regards,

Behcet
<= /div>
Thanks.

-Chairs.



_______________________________________________
netext mailing list
netext@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext


--f46d0421a78b3c408b04d3936ba4--