[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Experimental RFC to be: draft-nagami-mip6-nemo-multihome-fixed-network-03.txt
The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'Multi-homing for small
scale fixed network Using Mobile IP and NEMO'
<draft-nagami-mip6-nemo-multihome-fixed-network-03.txt> as an
Experimental RFC.
The IESG would also like the RFC-Editor to review the comments in the
datatracker
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=11618&rfc_flag=0)
related to this document and determine whether or not they merit
incorporation into the document. Comments may exist in both the ballot
and the comment log.
The IESG contact person is Jari Arkko.
A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nagami-mip6-nemo-multihome-fixed-network-03.txt
The process for such documents is described at http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html.
Thank you,
The IESG Secretary
Technical Summary
This document specifies the use of techniques either
developed or under development in the MONAMI6 and NEMO
working groups for solving a multihoming problem in
a fixed network.
Working Group Summary
This is an independent submission via the RFC Editor.
Protocol Quality
Jari Arkko has reviwed the specification for conflicts
with IETF work, as specified in RFC 3932. The NEMO,
MONAMI6, SHIM6, and MIP6 chairs were contacted during
this review.
Note to RFC Editor
The official response is
The IESG thinks that this work is related to IETF work done in
the MONAMI6, NEMO, MIP6, and SHIM6 working groups, but
this does not prevent publishing.
In addition we would like the RFC Editor and the authors
to be careful in how they refer to ongoing work, to use
the latest reference and to correctly characterize the
state of the work. Specifically, draft-wakikawa-mobileip-multiplecoa
reference should point to ongoing work in MONAMI6 WG,
i.e., draft-ietf-monami6-multiplecoa, which is a later development
of the same specification. The normative/informative reference
status should be reviewed along with the text
in the body of the document. The text should portray this
work as an example of ongoing work unless the authors are
willing to hold their work up for a normative reference.
Similarly, draft-wakikawa-mip6-nemo-haha-01.txt has been
discussed in the NEMO WG butFrom ietf-announce-bounces at ietf.org Mon Feb 26 23:38:09 2007
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1HLtoY-0004Ot-VI; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:19:46 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1HLtoX-0004MY-VY; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:19:45 -0500
Received: from ns1.neustar.com ([2001:503:c779:1a::9c9a:108a])
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1HLtoW-0001KW-GX; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:19:45 -0500
Received: from stiedprstage1.ietf.org (stiedprstage1.va.neustar.com
[10.31.47.10]) by ns1.neustar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CEB726EB6;
Tue, 27 Feb 2007 04:19:44 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from ietf by stiedprstage1.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43)
id 1HLtoW-0008Mx-8m; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:19:44 -0500
X-test-idtracker: no
From: The IESG <iesg-secretary at ietf.org>
To: RFC Editor <rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <E1HLtoW-0008Mx-8m at stiedprstage1.ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:19:44 -0500
X-Spam-Score: -2.8 (--)
X-Scan-Signature: 31247fb3be228bb596db9127becad0bc
Cc: iana at iana.org, The IESG <iesg at ietf.org>, ietf-announce at ietf.org
Subject: Re: Experimental RFC to be:
draft-nagami-mip6-nemo-multihome-fixed-network-03.txt
X-BeenThere: ietf-announce at ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: ietf-announce.ietf.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce>,
<mailto:ietf-announce-request at ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-announce at ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-announce-request at ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce>,
<mailto:ietf-announce-request at ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ietf-announce-bounces at ietf.org
The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'Multi-homing for small
scale fixed network Using Mobile IP and NEMO'
<draft-nagami-mip6-nemo-multihome-fixed-network-03.txt> as an
Experimental RFC.
The IESG would also like the RFC-Editor to review the comments in the
datatracker
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=11618&rfc_flag=0)
related to this document and determine whether or not they merit
incorporation into the document. Comments may exist in both the ballot
and the comment log.
The IESG contact person is Jari Arkko.
A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nagami-mip6-nemo-multihome-fixed-network-03.txt
The process for such documents is described at http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html.
Thank you,
The IESG Secretary
Technical Summary
This document specifies the use of techniques either
developed or under development in the MONAMI6 and NEMO
working groups for solving a multihoming problem in
a fixed network.
Working Group Summary
This is an independent submission via the RFC Editor.
Protocol Quality
Jari Arkko has reviwed the specification for conflicts
with IETF work, as specified in RFC 3932. The NEMO,
MONAMI6, SHIM6, and MIP6 chairs were contacted during
this review.
Note to RFC Editor
The official response is
The IESG thinks that this work is related to IETF work done in
the MONAMI6, NEMO, MIP6, and SHIM6 working groups, but
this does not prevent publishing.
In addition we would like the RFC Editor and the authors
to be careful in how they refer to ongoing work, to use
the latest reference and to correctly characterize the
state of the work. Specifically, draft-wakikawa-mobileip-multiplecoa
reference should point to ongoing work in MONAMI6 WG,
i.e., draft-ietf-monami6-multiplecoa, which is a later development
of the same specification. The normative/informative reference
status should be reviewed along with the text
in the body of the document. The text should portray this
work as an example of ongoing work unless the authors are
willing to hold their work up for a normative reference.
Similarly, draft-wakikawa-mip6-nemo-haha-01.txt has been
discussed in the NEMO WG but has not yet been adopted, so it
too should be characterized as an example of ongoing work.
IESG Note
Please use the standard IESG note 2:
This RFC is not a candidate for any level of Internet Standard.
The IETF disclaims any knowledge of the fitness of this RFC for
any purpose and in particular notes that the decision to publish
is not based on IETF review for such things as security,
congestion control, or inappropriate interaction with deployed
protocols. The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at
its discretion. Readers of this document should exercise caution
in evaluating its value for implementation and deployment. See
RFC 3932 for more information.
IANA Note
There are no IANA considerations.
_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
IETF-Announce at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce