Subject: Re: (multi6) Salt Lake meeting agenda

From: Thomas Narten <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 15:32:27 -0500

> I would like a small slot during the Salt Lake meeting to discuss issues
> with draft-multi6-py-mhtp-01.txt

I assume you mean draft-py-multi6-mhtp-01.txt, which is now out.

The chairs tend to believe that presentations on solutions are
premature until we complete the requirements drafts. We also have a
one-hour slot in SLC, which wouldn't allow much time for detailed
discussions on proposals.

At this point, we believe we should focus on getting the following
documents out of the WG:

	  draft-ietf-multi6-multihoming-requirements-02.txt
	  draft-ietf-multi6-v4-multihoming-00.txt

There has been a fair amount of recent discussion on the requirements
document, but none on the ID that was submitted. Is this one ready for
WG Last Call? I'd like to see everyone read it for Salt Lake City and
all remaining issues out on the table.

FYI, I also count the following documents that are related to the
multi6 effort:

draft-py-multi6-mhtp-01.txt
draft-bagnulo-multi6-survey6-00.txt
draft-huitema-multi6-hosts-00.txt
draft-ramki-multi6-nlmp-00.txt
draft-hain-ipv6-pi-addr-01.txt
draft-hain-ipv6-pi-addr-use-01.txt

Thomas

---

From: "Michel Py" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:36:53 -0800

Thomas and multi6 folk,

>> document, but none on the ID that was submitted.

I believe it is because, thanks to Joe, we had a preview of what was
being submitted and discussed the preview and not the actual submission.

>> Is this one ready for WG Last Call? I'd like to see everyone read it
for
>> Salt Lake City and all remaining issues out on the table.

I think that draft-ietf-multi6-multihoming-requirements-02.txt is ready
for WG Last Call.

IMHO there are two points where semantics could be debated, 3.1.4 Policy
(that has been debated a while ago) and 3.2.6 Cooperation where I think
we need a clear definition of the word "cooperation".

>> draft-hain-ipv6-pi-addr-use-01.txt

I have included a section "compliance with the requirements" in my own
text, and Christian did something similar in his. I encourage authors of
solutions drafts to do the same.

Michel