sorry about that I think Christian sent it to the mlthe link is http://users.piuha.net/chvogt/pub/2008/draft-vogt-savi-rationale-00.txt
regards, marcelo David Harrington escribió:
I also did not find draft-vogt-savi-rationale in the ID repository.dbh-----Original Message-----From: savi-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:savi-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of MARCELO BAGNULO BRAUNSent: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:01 PM To: savi at ietf.orgSubject: Re: [savi] Working Group Adoption of Individual SAVI DocumentsCorrection, only one of these draft is expired, draft-mcpherson-savi-threat-scope, (BTW you can easily find in tools.ietf.org besides many other sites, such as waterspings and so on)Regards, marcelo David Harrington <ietfdbh at comcast.net> dijo:Hi, It appears some of these drafts have expired. Can the drafts be re-published so people can look at them before making a decision? I suggest you extend the review period accordingly. David Harrington dbharrington at comcast.net ietfdbh at comcast.net dharrington at huawei.com-----Original Message----- From: savi-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:savi-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christian Vogt Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 12:15 AM To: SAVI Mailing List Subject: [savi] Working Group Adoption of Individual SAVIDocumentsDear all -At the previous SAVI meeting in Minneapolis, we did a voteregardingwhich individual documents to use as starting points for the SAVI working group deliverables. I would now like to confirm thisdecisionfrom Minneapolis here on the mailing list. The result of the vote in Minneapolis was thus: - To adopt draft-mcpherson-savi-threat-scope as a starting point for the Threats Analysis (Problem Statement) document: 7 in favour, 0 against. - To adopt draft-vogt-savi-rationale as a starting point for the Rationale document: 7 in favour, 0 against. - To adopt draft-bagnulo-savi-fcfs as a starting point for both the IPv4 and IPv6 Solution documents: 11 in favour, 2 against. - To adopt draft-bagnulo-savi-send as a starting point for the SeND-based IPv6 Solution document: 8 in favour, 1 against. Arguments raised by those voting against the adoption of one oftheindividual documents above related to potential security vulnerabilities or potential issues with mobile hosts. Both arguments would need to be addressed as the working group deliverables are being advanced. Please express on this mailing list whether or not you agree withtheabove documents being adopted by the SAVI working group asstartingpoints for the various working group deliverables. Please alsostatethe reasons in case you are against one of the documents being adopted. - Christian _______________________________________________ savi mailing list savi at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/savi_______________________________________________ savi mailing list savi at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/savi-- ---- MARCELO BAGNULO BRAUN WebCartero Universidad Carlos III de Madrid _______________________________________________ savi mailing list savi at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/savi
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.