[14:55:51] --- LOGGING STARTED
[20:33:15] --- jlcjohn has joined
[20:35:47] --- tom5760@gmail.com has joined
[20:43:52] --- yowada has joined
[20:44:39] --- frodek has joined
[20:46:57] --- yowada has left
[20:47:56] --- nm has joined
[20:48:43] --- dthaler has joined
[20:49:01] <dthaler> Problem Statement and Goals <http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/07dec/slides/16ng-4.ppt>
[20:49:22] * dthaler has changed the subject to: 16ng Working Group meeting
[20:51:43] --- igarashi has joined
[20:55:13] <dthaler> Alex: when talking about non-IETF docs like 802.16e, what version do we refer to?
[20:55:39] --- john.zhao has joined
[20:56:11] <dthaler> Ethernet CS <http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/07dec/slides/16ng-1.ppt>
[20:57:35] <dthaler> draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16-03.txt
[21:00:41] --- yowada has joined
[21:05:55] <dthaler> Jari: length of last call not as important as whether it actually gets review
[21:06:49] <dthaler> ?: maybe arrange a conf call with 802.16 participants to review
[21:07:09] <dthaler> IPv4 CS <http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/07dec/slides/16ng-0.ppt>
[21:12:43] --- florent.parent@gmail.com has joined
[21:13:54] <dthaler> shoudl change MTU text to match what the IPv6 CS doc says
[21:17:30] <dthaler> Dave: can't say the same since in IPv6, AR can pass a lower MTU in an RA, can't do that in IPv4
[21:24:37] <dthaler> Dave: appendix still talks about ARP behavior, better to remove it since it begs more questions than it answers and other IP-over-foo documents don't feel the need to have anything like that
[21:25:06] <dthaler> Gabriel: same comment about the NAT text
[21:25:40] <dthaler> Deployment Scenario <http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/07dec/slides/16ng-2.ppt>
[21:26:03] <dthaler> (not about a draft)
[21:27:36] --- john.zhao has left: Computer went to sleep
[21:28:58] --- john.zhao has joined
[21:34:45] <dthaler> Alex: for MTU issue, maybe doing a ping with a large payload size and look at what size reply fragments come back
[21:35:26] <dthaler> ?: in WiBro, how resolve addresses if it's shared link model and no ARP?
[21:36:02] <dthaler> Gabriel: you said IPv6 support coming in 2008, is it in trial already?
[21:36:24] <dthaler> Ji Hoon Lee: don't know, have to ask providers
[21:37:28] <dthaler> Basavaraj: so WiBro is moving to the p2p link model or not?
[21:42:41] <dthaler> there needs to be a document to continue discussion
[21:42:56] <dthaler> <end of meeting>
[21:42:57] --- nm has left
[21:42:57] --- yowada has left
[21:43:22] --- igarashi has left
[21:43:22] --- dthaler has left
[21:43:40] --- jlcjohn has left
[21:45:06] --- john.zhao has left
[21:45:19] --- tom5760@gmail.com has left
[21:56:17] --- frodek has left
[21:58:26] --- john.zhao has joined
[22:05:28] --- florent.parent@gmail.com has left
[22:17:01] --- john.zhao has left: Replaced by new connection
[22:17:02] --- john.zhao has joined
[23:08:41] --- john.zhao has left