Re: [Autoconf] On WG progress and draft-ietf-autoconf-adhoc-addr-model

[Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu at gmail.com>]

Ryuji Wakikawa a écrit :
> Hi Alex,
>
> There is a case to adapt a DT document in WG without adaption call. 
> Did you remember we had an adaption call for NEMO-BS?

I think we did, if I remember correctly (you correct me).

I do remember though that there was a call about whether or not a NEMO 
DT had to be formed or not.

That was long ago.  Nowadays one goes through call after call.

There is also this thing that sometimes people take votes in the WG
meeting and sometimes avoid (or forget?) to confirm on the list - it 
sometimes sounds ok.  But here this time it was like no call neither 
f2f, neither on the list - nowhere, just a pressure to go fast.

> The PMIP IPv4 support doc was published as a WG doc from the
> beginning, because the NETLMM WG formed DT.

There was a call on PMIPv6 DT output though (the most important output
of the group), I am not sure about the PMIP IPv4 support.

Long ago I considered even NETLMM to be badly run - I got kicked off it :-)

> In AUTOCONF WG, we have decided to publish the first DT doc as an 
> individual document.

That was good.

> After 6 months, authors reflects WG agreement to the document (well 
> maybe not your opinion though).
>
> I am not repeating the same reasons why we adapt this doc here again.
>  You can refer to other mails from us. anyway, the adaption call is
> still open. We cannot retire the WG doc, but we can replace it if
> that is the WG consensus.

Ok, let's wait (until which date?) to see how much support is for one
draft and for another.

Alex