Subject: RE: [nemo] RE: [Mip6] Consensus call on makingIDdraft-wakikawa-nemo-v4tunnel a MIP6/NEMO WGs document

From: "Soliman, Hesham" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 03:31:03 -0500

Hi Raj, 

I misunderstood your question, so I take back the yes below
about the scenario. I don't see how or why you picked this 
scenario in the first place. I do think we need a list of 
priorities for scenarios to consider but we need 
to do that in the context of draft-larsson which is the only
doc that lists all scenarios. Once we have that discussion
we can pick scenarios to consider for solutions.

Hesham

 > -----Original Message-----
 > From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On 
 > Behalf Of
 > Soliman, Hesham
 > Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 3:58 PM
 > To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
 > Subject: RE: [nemo] RE: [Mip6] Consensus call on
 > makingIDdraft-wakikawa-nemo-v4tunnel a MIP6/NEMO WGs document
 > 
 > 
 > 
 >  > Do you agree/disagree that the above scenario is the one 
 > that needs
 >  > to be solved ASAP?
 > 
 > => I agree.
 > 
 >  > (Note: It does not imply that other scenarios are 
 >  > irrelevant. It simply
 >  > means that this is the scenario worth working on and has the most 
 >  > significant priority or value for MIP6 deployment.)
 >  > 
 >  > 2. ID:  draft-wakikawa-nemo-v4tunnel can be used as the 
 > baseline. It
 >  > does not imply that we are ruling out 
 > draft-soliman-v4v6-mipv6 or any
 >  > other. 
 > 
 > => I don't see how it doesn't imply that. I think we should agree
 > on the scenario first, without associating it with either 
 > draft-wakikawa
 > or draft-soliman. Once we agreed, we can discuss how to solve the 
 > problem. I disagree with making draft-wakikawa a baseline. 
 > 
 > Hesham
 > 
 > The IDs can be combined w.r.t the parts that address 
 >  > this scenario.
 >  > Additionally once it is a WG document, what goes into the ID 
 >  > is decided
 >  > by the WG. So lets not get into arguments of what or whose 
 >  > draft is the
 >  > one that should be made the WG document.
 >  > 
 >  > -Basavaraj
 >  > 
 >  > 
 > 
 > ===========================================================
 > This email may contain confidential and privileged material 
 > for the sole use
 >  of the intended recipient.  Any review or distribution by 
 > others is strictly
 >  prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient please 
 > contact the sender
 >  and delete all copies.
 > ===========================================================
 > 
 > 
 >