Re: [Dime] New draft for Diameter ERP: poll for adoption

[Qin Wu <sunseawq at huawei.com>]

> Hi all, 
> 
> there seems to be a misunderstanding here. 
> 
> We have a working group document with agreed authors. 
> The only question therefore is what the group wants to go into the
> existing document - the content. No new document will be added to the
> DIME milestones.
> 
> What Sebastien should be asking the group is whether the content in
> draft-sdecugis-dime-diameter-erp-01.txt should be included in the next
> version of draft-ietf-dime-erp. 

[Qin]: I support incorporating Sebastien's changes into next version of draft-ietf-dime-erp.

> In any case, it is good to ask the group whether this significant change
> should be made. 
> 
> My answer: I believe that this is the right direction, as I indicated
> previously on the list. 
> 
> Ciao
> Hannes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: dime-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:dime-bounces at ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of ext Julien Bournelle
> Sent: 09 June, 2009 10:02
> To: Sebastien Decugis
> Cc: dime at ietf.org; hokey at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Dime] New draft for Diameter ERP: poll for
> adoption
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> See inline,
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 5:57 AM, Sebastien Decugis
> <sdecugis at nict.go.jp> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi all DIME and HOKEY members,
> 
> I have gone forward on the Diameter ERP topic and
> created a new draft
> [1] with the same content (re-organized, hopefully for
> clarity) as I
> presented during last DIME meeting in IETF#74. The main
> change with
> current draft-ietf-dime-erp-00 is the use of a new
> separate Diameter
> application for messages exchanged between the NAS and
> the ER server.
> 
> I would like to poll the people interested in this topic
> about the
> adoption of this new document for Diameter ERP (in which
> case it would
> become draft-ietf-dime-erp-01). I don't know if this can
> be done before
> the next IETF meeting, or at least during the meeting in
> Stockholm?
> 
> 
> 
> AFAIK, this is not how things are working at IETF. The WG has
> already a WG document called draft-ietf-dime-erp-00.txt which is
> supposed to reflect the current WG consensus. We can't arrive with a new
> individual submission and just bypass the current WG I-D. At least, I
> never saw that.
> 
> Having said that, we have an issue with the current WG document
> concerning use of a new Application-ID or reuse of the Diameter EAP. My
> understanding was that we were a little blocked because of an
> architectural issue concerning the HOKEY server in regards to AAA/EAP
> server and because of a routing issue. So I'd like to know what has
> changed from this point.
> 
> Note that I'm not against your proposal per se. We just have to
> get a consensus.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Julien
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for reading, and eventually providing your
> comments.
> Sebastien.
> 
> [1]
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sdecugis-dime-diameter-erp-01.
> txt
> 
> --
> Sebastien Decugis
> Research fellow
> Network Architecture Group
> NICT (nict.go.jp)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> DiME at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> DiME at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime