Subject: Re: [Mipshop] MIPSHOP Draft Agenda for IETF 67

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 11:48:33 -0700 (PDT)

Vijay,
  Alper may have a good point.
In order to resolve such issues we have a nice tool in IETF called the design team.
  Why not have some design teams in Mipshop working on the major issues? Rather than getting bogged down in the I-D selection?

Regards,

Behcet

----- Original Message ----
From: Vijay Devarapalli <[email-masked]>
To: Alper Yegin <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 1:28:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Mipshop] MIPSHOP Draft Agenda for IETF 67

Alper Yegin wrote:
>>>>     draft-kempf-mipshop-handover-key-00.txt
>>>>     draft-vidya-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-03.txt
>>>>     draft-haddad-mipshop-hmipv6-security-06
>>> What's the status of these documents?
>> waiting for various reviews. when these documents
>> went through a consensus call to be adopted as
>> WG documents back in March/April, it was decided
>> they need to reviewed by the security directorate
>> and mobility directorate. we got some of the
>> reviews back.
> 
> So, are they on-track to be adopted now or not? 

they are. unless there are significant technical
issues.

> Now that there are other
> alternatives on the table, how does the WG want to deal with this?

the WG needs to be convinced that these alternatives
are better and have advantages over the drafts that
are being considered currently.

Vijay

_______________________________________________
Mipshop mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop

_______________________________________________
Mipshop mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop