[03:38:56] --- hong_psl has joined
[03:39:26] --- hong_psl has left
[08:39:09] --- shivanajay has joined
[08:42:30] --- shivanajay has left
[08:49:03] --- shivanajay has joined
[08:50:07] --- shivanajay has left
[08:50:24] --- shivanajay has joined
[08:51:14] --- cgn has joined
[08:51:24] --- cgn has left
[08:51:41] --- cgn has joined
[08:54:05] <cgn> https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/meeting_materials.cgi?meeting_num=66
[09:03:53] <cgn> Agenda is here http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/06jul/agenda/nsis.txt
[09:04:54] --- magnus has joined
[09:05:50] --- christian.dickmann has joined
[09:06:10] <christian.dickmann> good morning
[09:06:29] <shivanajay> good morning
[09:06:29] <cgn> Good Morning
[09:06:39] <christian.dickmann> what time is it at montreal?
[09:06:45] <shivanajay> 9:09
[09:06:58] <christian.dickmann> so, the session already started?
[09:07:02] <shivanajay> they r setting the projector
[09:07:26] <christian.dickmann> ok, and no activity on the mic yet, right?
[09:07:41] <shivanajay> no
[09:08:04] <shivanajay> start
[09:08:22] <cgn> Agenda bashing
[09:08:50] <cgn> http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/06jul/slides/nsis-6.ppt
[09:08:53] --- hong_psl has joined
[09:12:21] --- esa has joined
[09:12:40] <cgn> Currently at "WG update - next steps" slides
[09:12:51] --- Jukka has joined
[09:14:33] <cgn> Rechartering topics
[09:18:40] <hong_psl> can anyone summarize the re-chartering discussion at the moment?
[09:18:48] <cgn> hu
[09:18:52] <cgn> that is a lot.
[09:18:59] <cgn> do you listen to the audio stream?
[09:19:15] <hong_psl> not really, could not find the link for the audio stream
[09:19:46] <christian.dickmann> yeah, was not linked, but I found it
[09:19:47] <christian.dickmann> http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/
[09:19:48] <cgn> Here it is
[09:19:49] <cgn> http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg42622.html
[09:19:58] <hong_psl> Thanks a lot
[09:20:10] <cgn> recharterting topics are the one on the slide
[09:20:20] <cgn> John is just talking about them
[09:20:48] <cgn> We are in room 520abc
[09:20:55] <christian.dickmann> Channel 6
[09:21:10] <hong_psl> Thanks. Will try that.
[09:21:34] <cgn> Next slide "Proposal"
[09:23:04] <cgn> end of slides
[09:23:11] <cgn> time for discussions!
[09:23:15] <cgn> comments are welcome
[09:23:27] <cgn> at the mike:
[09:23:38] <cgn> about 3gpp and QoS signalling
[09:23:48] <cgn> centralized QoS control
[09:23:55] <shivanajay> whats the name?
[09:24:03] <cgn> haven't understood it
[09:24:09] <cgn> can't read badge
[09:24:31] <cgn> don't ignore what is out there consider 3gpp
[09:24:48] <cgn> 2nd aspect: service, policies in 3gpp, tispan, etc
[09:25:37] <cgn> John: quick summary:
[09:25:53] <cgn> take what has already been done
[09:26:04] <cgn> interwork/overlay with existing QoS signalling work
[09:26:56] <cgn> using nsis for 3gpp to signal QoSs from the terminal instead of pdp context
[09:27:13] <cgn> Tine on mike
[09:27:25] <shivanajay> or Tina?
[09:27:31] <cgn> what to ask to the other bodies
[09:27:38] <cgn> don't know last name.
[09:28:06] <cgn> Sorry, Tina! (of course)
[09:28:35] <cgn> 3gpp has already some specs
[09:28:43] <cgn> John: IETF doesn't submit change requests
[09:29:05] <cgn> to the people in jabber:
[09:29:08] <cgn> is the audio level fine?
[09:29:13] <cgn> Robert
[09:29:16] --- HannesTschofenig has joined
[09:29:22] <cgn> Support for both speakers
[09:29:28] <christian.dickmann> yes it is, Tina was not as loud as others ...
[09:29:34] <cgn> ok
[09:29:43] <cgn> Tina was a little bit away from the mike
[09:29:59] --- loughney has joined
[09:30:09] <cgn> RĂ¼diger Geib:
[09:30:28] <cgn> interworking with RSVP part of the charter?
[09:30:47] <cgn> John: would be possible, but need proposal for it
[09:31:07] <cgn> RSVP extensions ongoing, may need to look how those services are working in nsis
[09:31:26] <cgn> no more comments
[09:31:32] <cgn> John: Got pretty good direction
[09:31:39] <cgn> talk with ADs about scope
[09:31:46] --- toyokkie has joined
[09:31:53] <cgn> Magnus on the way to the mike
[09:31:57] <cgn> AD speaking!
[09:32:22] <cgn> AD does not want nsis strangle down to do no work
[09:32:32] <cgn> but what to see what works and what needs to be fixed.
[09:32:37] <cgn> main think:
[09:32:41] <cgn> thing!
[09:32:51] <cgn> what is the most important case to make nsis succesful
[09:33:02] <cgn> running all proposals will not help much
[09:33:13] <cgn> let's focus to things we feel are important
[09:33:20] <cgn> John as chair: agrees
[09:33:52] <cgn> work on a cahrter that does not cover everything
[09:33:54] <cgn> Henning:
[09:33:58] --- esa has left: Replaced by new connection
[09:34:22] <cgn> condition for getting something into the charter: getting reviewers ahead of time.
[09:34:30] <cgn> If no reviewers ahead, no way to charter
[09:34:35] <cgn> Lars:
[09:34:41] <cgn> Likes it but not sufficient
[09:35:00] <cgn> having reviews prooves not the usefullness
[09:35:16] <cgn> talk about it is working in DCCP WG
[09:35:25] <cgn> focus on potential customers
[09:35:42] <cgn> Robert
[09:35:42] --- loughney has left: Lost connection
[09:35:42] --- Jukka has left: Lost connection
[09:35:42] --- HannesTschofenig has left: Lost connection
[09:35:42] --- toyokkie has left: Lost connection
[09:35:42] --- hong_psl has left: Lost connection
[09:35:42] --- christian.dickmann has left: Lost connection
[09:35:45] <cgn> speaking
[09:35:55] <cgn> One point not agenda but discussed in mipshop
[09:35:58] <cgn> John
[09:36:11] <cgn> Mipshop working on media independent handover
[09:36:20] <cgn> proposal for using GIST as transport for their protocol
[09:38:10] <cgn> Lars
[09:38:28] <cgn> Political level
[09:38:42] <cgn> keeping changing the protocol, nsis will perceived as not ready yet
[09:38:45] <cgn> Xiaoming
[09:39:07] <cgn> Saying that SCTP has only small change
[09:39:09] <cgn> Lars
[09:39:23] <cgn> Comment was general level, not talking about specific level
[09:39:30] <cgn> Need potential interest from a "user"
[09:39:48] <cgn> Additional item:
[09:39:53] <cgn> from Xiamoning
[09:39:59] <cgn> Interest from diagnostic function
[09:40:00] <cgn> John
[09:40:05] <cgn> Bring it is in the 2nd half
[09:40:35] <cgn> Now: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp
[09:40:42] <cgn> Status slide
[09:40:56] --- admcd has joined
[09:41:12] <cgn> Slide is here http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/06jul/slides/nsis-10.ppt
[09:41:21] <cgn> Next slide current snapshot
[09:42:08] <cgn> next slide
[09:42:50] <cgn> Next slide: Parameter Proposals
[09:43:23] --- lars has joined
[09:44:14] <cgn> Henning:
[09:44:18] <cgn> add some SIP experience
[09:44:32] <cgn> Basic experience about settable parameters
[09:44:39] <cgn> every implementor will find another value
[09:44:50] --- toyokkie has joined
[09:45:10] <cgn> Advice against making things adjustable
[09:45:30] <cgn> (unknown name):
[09:45:35] <cgn> Arguing against it
[09:45:53] <cgn> for tunable parameters
[09:46:02] <cgn> different types of access need different parameters
[09:46:20] <cgn> Henning:
[09:46:42] --- christian.dickmann has joined
[09:47:03] <cgn> (scribe has tired fingers...)
[09:48:21] --- hong_psl has joined
[09:49:03] <cgn> A phone is running with "blablabla" :-)
[09:49:15] <admcd> [interruption from a rather amusing phone ring tone - "How about that!!"]
[09:49:41] <admcd> obviously concurring with Magnus
[09:49:47] <cgn> Slide "Parameter Limiting"
[09:50:55] <cgn> next slide "Parameter Limiting (2/29
[09:52:27] --- loughney has joined
[09:56:25] --- HannesTschofenig has joined
[09:56:26] <cgn> link bandwidth or token bucket
[09:56:29] <cgn> needs checking
[09:56:53] <cgn> next slides
[09:56:57] <cgn> iana considerations
[10:00:02] <cgn> John: modify allocation to be more relaxed.
[10:00:53] <cgn> Robert: folks should speak up if change of allocation rules is needed
[10:01:05] <cgn> .
[10:01:11] <cgn> Next Presentation is
[10:01:11] <cgn> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-nsis-tunnel-00.txt
[10:02:56] --- loughney has left: Replaced by new connection
[10:03:52] <cgn> Slide is "Open Issues"
[10:05:12] <cgn> Volunteers for review are welcome!
[10:06:39] <cgn> hu, many people are volunteering!
[10:06:50] <cgn> Now:
[10:06:51] <cgn> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp-sctp-00.txt
[10:06:54] <christian.dickmann> who? just for the log
[10:06:58] <admcd> Martin
[10:07:00] <admcd> Georgios
[10:07:04] <admcd> Me (Andrew)
[10:07:18] <cgn> Ah, now I now again who is admcd :-)
[10:07:28] <cgn> Slide "Current Status"
[10:07:39] <admcd> I should have said: Martin (cgn) I suppose ;-)
[10:07:44] <cgn> Jep, right!
[10:09:24] <cgn> there is work on DTLS over SCTP
[10:11:32] <cgn> Next Presentation
[10:11:32] <cgn> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp-statemachine
[10:11:47] --- shivanajay has left
[10:12:03] <cgn> First slide
[10:12:20] --- shivanajay has joined
[10:12:54] <cgn> Next steps slide
[10:13:26] <cgn> (early warning: scribe will be away when the next presentation starts)
[10:13:49] <cgn> slides about implementation status
[10:15:24] <cgn> next presentation is about NATW NSLP
[10:15:32] <cgn> nope
[10:15:41] <cgn> it is mobile ipv6 - nsis interaction
[10:16:28] --- rbless has joined
[10:16:51] <rbless> Interop event would be nice...
[10:17:59] <cgn> John to send email about interop
[10:18:03] <christian.dickmann> John & Henning: An webpage listing implementations would be nice
[10:18:11] <cgn> It is NATFW NSLP time
[10:18:12] <rbless> we currently have GIST, QoS NSLP and NAT/FW implementations...to be publicly released real soon...
[10:18:27] <christian.dickmann> wow, natfw, nice :)
[10:19:09] <HannesTschofenig> Very good. I am looking forward to see the NATFW NSLP interop testing.
[10:19:20] --- loughney has joined
[10:19:45] --- loughney has left
[10:20:18] --- Jukka has joined
[10:20:46] <HannesTschofenig> Who is presenting?
[10:20:54] <christian.dickmann> Martin
[10:21:00] <christian.dickmann> right?
[10:21:19] <admcd> yes
[10:23:19] <rbless> slides online?? nsis-16.ppt seems to be something else..
[10:23:48] <rbless> Agreed!!!
[10:23:54] <christian.dickmann> rbless you are right
[10:24:38] --- hong_psl has left
[10:25:43] <rbless> What about DTINFO_IPv6? I guess this is still required...
[10:25:59] <admcd> yes, it is wrong
[10:26:04] <christian.dickmann> cgn: can you please request, that your slides are updated, because currently another presentation is online?
[10:26:15] <admcd> john found the right slides, not sure where available
[10:27:06] --- shivanajay has left
[10:28:17] <rbless> But DTINFO_IPv6 is required, too if signaling
[10:28:20] --- shivanajay has joined
[10:28:29] <rbless> for firewalls...
[10:30:27] <rbless> Pathcoupled not always possible, esp. if sender unknown you have to use Loose End MRM, but I guess we must take it to the list...
[10:31:20] <christian.dickmann> as few days ago I spoke to Martin and he basically said: you simply need to know what to do as the end-host (use LE-MRM or PC-MRM). How you know that is out of scope ..
[10:32:19] <christian.dickmann> Open issue: There are a lot of "you need to know this information about your network". Do we need some more text, HOW you could get to know that?
[10:32:52] <rbless> If you want to block traffic from many sources you have to use LE-MRM...and in this case you will need that DTINFO_IPv6...
[10:33:29] <christian.dickmann> rbless: yes, we need to take that to the list. I have concerns too
[10:33:42] <cgn> The DTINFO will get a revision hopefully clarifying many issues
[10:33:57] <cgn> There is currently some fuzziness
[10:34:08] <cgn> however, feel free to send to comments!
[10:34:17] <christian.dickmann> [16:25]<christian.dickmann> cgn: can you please request, that your slides are updated, because currently another presentation is online?
[10:34:53] <cgn> Jep
[10:34:57] <cgn> will write to John.
[10:34:58] <cgn> Thanks
[10:35:03] <cgn> Christian and Roland
[10:35:13] <cgn> we can have an off-line chat about the DTINFO if you like.
[10:35:22] <cgn> Good to have comments on this on how to get it clear.
[10:36:37] <cgn> Currently running : QoS NSLP
[10:41:45] <cgn> proxy mode seems to be agreed
[10:42:29] <cgn> Next presentation
[10:42:30] <cgn> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-10.txt
[10:45:59] <cgn> Next presentation
[10:46:07] <cgn> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-nsis-rmd-07.txt
[10:49:01] <cgn> Next presentation
[10:49:09] <cgn> draft-kappler-nsis-qosmodel-controlledload-04.txt
[10:49:56] <cgn> Talk about Y.1541 by Al Morton before next
[10:49:58] <cgn> presentation
[10:50:17] <cgn> WGLC for Y.1541 started
[10:50:40] <cgn> draft-ietf-nsis-y1541-qosm-02.txt
[10:50:46] <cgn> Now draft-kappler-nsis-qosmodel-controlledload-04.txt
[10:51:04] <cgn> Open Issues/Next Steps
[10:53:11] --- HannesTschofenig has left: Replaced by new connection
[10:56:25] <cgn> Next slide
[10:56:39] <cgn> draft-ietf-nsis-applicability-mobility-signaling-05.txt
[10:57:06] <cgn> John: Asking people to think what is missing for getting deployable QoS with NSIS.
[10:57:56] <cgn> Seong-Ho: Submitted 3GPP QoS model to NSIS WG
[10:58:44] <cgn> Question to the ADs: Reusing exisiting QoS work
[10:59:00] <rbless> more work on inter-domain QoS and aggregation...I wanted to submit a draft on that, but was not able to work on it since the last meeting. But I'll start that now and Hannes also expressed interest on that topic...
[11:03:21] <cgn> Now draft-ietf-nsis-applicability-mobility-signaling-05.txt
[11:05:08] <cgn> Status slide
[11:07:02] <cgn> next slide
[11:07:13] <cgn> "Status of -05 version II)
[11:12:12] <cgn> Next Slide "Clarification on #3"
[11:13:31] --- loughney has joined
[11:13:48] <cgn> next slide
[11:14:53] <cgn> next slide "multihoming issues"
[11:16:14] <cgn> next slide
[11:18:12] <cgn> next slide "mobility object"
[11:18:48] <cgn> next slide "next steps"
[11:20:44] --- rbless has left
[11:22:11] <cgn> Session done
[11:22:11] <cgn> bye
[11:22:12] --- cgn has left
[11:22:42] --- lars has left
[11:23:06] --- admcd has left
[11:23:43] --- toyokkie has left
[11:25:12] --- shivanajay has left
[11:27:20] --- loughney has left
[11:27:58] --- magnus has left
[12:04:41] --- Jukka has left
[13:39:59] --- elwynd has joined
[14:26:23] --- elwynd has left
[14:34:10] --- elwynd has joined
[15:08:05] --- elwynd has left
[15:12:16] --- shivanajay has joined
[15:13:19] <shivanajay> is anyone taking notes? jabber?
[15:15:18] --- admcd has joined
[15:16:00] <admcd> Rob currently talking about the PDS draft
[15:16:06] --- Martin has joined
[15:16:15] --- toyokkie has joined
[15:16:30] <Martin> Somebody doing the scribe here?
[15:16:35] <Martin> Otherwise I'll do it.
[15:17:01] <shivanajay> <admcd> seems to be dong that
[15:17:05] <shivanajay> ?
[15:17:14] <Martin> Ok
[15:17:37] <admcd> I'll try since cgn seems not to be here
[15:17:53] <Martin> :-)
[15:18:06] <Martin> (Martin formerly known as cgn :-)
[15:18:29] <admcd> I guessed as much - couldn't see you in the room
[15:18:40] <Martin> left hand back off you
[15:19:28] <admcd> John: when discussed privately with other people - these approach has good benefits - allows you to detect routing/topology changes quickly
[15:19:41] <admcd> John: if only have more centralised node this is more difficult
[15:19:54] <admcd> John: that's one reason for keeping query message in this way
[15:20:18] --- elwynd has joined
[15:20:27] <admcd> talking about slide "PDS in action"
[15:20:46] --- rbless has joined
[15:21:33] <admcd> related functionality slide
[15:22:30] <admcd> aim not to define new protocols - basically an applicability statement
[15:23:50] <admcd> next steps: would like working group adoption
[15:23:58] <admcd> not much work left to do on it
[15:24:14] <admcd> goal is as an applicability statement for gist
[15:24:31] <admcd> John: when nsis was chartered that was interest in offpath signalling
[15:24:59] <admcd> J: different ways to do this. one of major sticking points has been that motivation/requirements have been quite diverse
[15:25:18] <admcd> J: the current document is fairly well scoped and defined, and is achievable
[15:25:26] <admcd> J: so something could do in a short amount of time
[15:25:45] <admcd> J: question to wg - is this a good starting point for offpath-ish work?
[15:26:03] --- loughney has joined
[15:26:22] <admcd> [i'll relay any comments from jabber - if anyone wants to comment]
[15:26:33] <admcd> Georgios: would like this work to happen
[15:26:52] <admcd> Al Morton: would like to see this done. liked earlier version. got better. would like to see it go forward
[15:26:59] <admcd> Xiaoming: support this work
[15:27:21] <christian.dickmann> I am raising my hand :)
[15:27:46] <admcd> [i hummed extra loudly for you as well ;-)]
[15:27:52] <christian.dickmann> thanks :)
[15:28:21] <admcd> sound in the room: positive hum in support
[15:29:18] <admcd> J: I think this can be fitted in within the scope of current charter - work on deployment
[15:29:35] <admcd> moving to various other individual submissions
[15:30:40] <admcd> John: want people to say not just 'looks nice' but 'i'm willing to do some work on this'
[15:30:59] <admcd> now: hypath
[15:31:22] <admcd> luis cordeiro presenting
[15:31:26] <admcd> work in done in euqos project
[15:32:07] --- HannesTschofenig has joined
[15:32:09] <admcd> since previous version added more detailed proposal, and architecture
[15:32:40] <admcd> a number of issues in progress - including definition of an mrm, security issues, etc
[15:32:58] <admcd> update on univ of coimbra implementation work:
[15:33:11] <admcd> - GIST + QoS NSLP + NAT/FW (in progress)
[15:35:40] <admcd> John: still too early to make this a working group draft - need to do some of the updates already in progress
[15:36:00] <admcd> John: people should review draft
[15:36:23] <admcd> Luis: don't think any qos nslp changes are needed, still experimenting
[15:36:39] <admcd> martin: is your code publically available?
[15:36:57] <admcd> luis: yes, I believe it is released under GPL
[15:37:13] <admcd> Communication patterns draft - Martin Stimmerling
[15:37:31] <admcd> base idea presented (without draft) at last ietf meeting
[15:37:36] --- lars has joined
[15:37:55] <admcd> looking at extending gist to support other communications patterns beyond path coupled and loose end mrm
[15:38:25] <admcd> motivation: find network resources (e.g. for network management)
[15:39:17] <admcd> GIST locates nodes with a particular property (e.g. with QoS NSLP, with NAT/FW NSLP)
[15:39:56] <admcd> Provide new patterns:
[15:40:06] <admcd> echo pattern - starts at node and expands in a ring
[15:40:23] <admcd> path-directed pattern - along a path but spreads out a hop or two to the sides
[15:40:58] <admcd> non-goals: immediate integration into gist
[15:41:10] <admcd> current goals: looking further other people interested in this
[15:41:32] <admcd> John: defining new MRMs - need some application associated with them
[15:42:02] <admcd> John: should continue with this, but take a particular application that would benefit from one of these patterns to verify that the MRM is useful
[15:42:21] --- christian.dickmann has left: Replaced by new connection
[15:42:49] --- christian.dickmann has joined
[15:43:39] <admcd> georgios: i like the draft. i think it has many applicable possibilities
[15:44:49] <admcd> laurent marchand: if you have a mobile node with a couple of access routers want a secure path between - could this be a possible technique
[15:45:02] <admcd> martin: echo pattern might be useful
[15:45:20] <admcd> martin: not sure whether this is possible - might work, might not
[15:46:01] <admcd> QoS NSLP authorization - Jukka Manner
[15:47:18] <admcd> is there interest in this work?
[15:47:36] <rbless> yes. :-)
[15:48:15] <admcd> someone from lucent: how is this work related to diameter qos application?
[15:48:48] <admcd> hannes: there are different authorization models, some use diameter to carry an authorization token
[15:49:22] <admcd> token first carried with nslp, then a router uses diameter to consult AAA server
[15:49:38] <admcd> ? from lucent: so this is a piece of the puzzle
[15:49:41] <admcd> hannes: yes
[15:50:32] <admcd> ?: in terms of firewall/nat control there is no diameter application
[15:50:48] <admcd> hannes: not fully true - same procedure except for qos parameters
[15:51:06] <admcd> john: what is protocol between firewall and central policy box?
[15:51:31] <admcd> hannes: in some other SDOs they using a 'gating'/firewalling function and lump it all together
[15:52:04] <admcd> martin: at current time there is not the split there, as there is with qos
[15:53:21] <admcd> ?: is there plans to investigate other techniques than tokens - in 3gpp/3gpp2 they are moving to tokenless methods based on transport subscription id
[15:53:36] <admcd> jukka: just different content for the authz data
[15:54:08] <admcd> ?: have heard vendors don't like tokens
[15:55:07] <admcd> jukka: that would be possible for future wok
[15:55:13] <admcd> s/wok/work/
[15:55:45] <admcd> john: any one read draft?
[15:55:48] <admcd> few hands
[15:56:02] <admcd> john: anyone support this as working group work?
[15:56:06] <admcd> similar few hands
[15:56:24] <admcd> inter-domain qos model - georgios
[15:57:27] <admcd> looking at interface between intra domain and inter domain qos control planes
[15:57:32] --- loughney has left
[15:57:50] <admcd> also define inter domain qos control plane in a domain
[15:58:06] <admcd> as well as interface between peer inter-domain os control planes
[15:58:20] <HannesTschofenig> "?" was Hui-Lan Lu
[15:58:25] <admcd> done using ITU-T Y-RACF QoS pull and push resource control modes
[15:58:45] <HannesTschofenig> ITU-IETF Liaison person from the ITU side
[15:58:47] <admcd> [hannes: thanks - i recognised here but couldn't remember name]
[16:01:14] <admcd> PDS draft does not describe mechanism for the discovery of an off-path qos controller by an off-path node - only does on-path to off-path and off-path to on-path
[16:04:22] <admcd> uses qos nslp
[16:04:54] <admcd> adds information to qspec for SLS parameters
[16:08:12] <admcd> proposal builds on top of pds
[16:08:18] <admcd> john: has anyone read draft?
[16:08:20] <admcd> no hands
[16:09:26] <admcd> hui-lan lu: if does become accepted, i think it would be useful to send liaison to itu - in particular to point out what racf requirements would be satisifed by this
[16:10:01] <admcd> john: is this something you would be interested in?
[16:10:08] --- lars has left
[16:10:39] <admcd> h-l l: in itu inter domain is offpath, intra domain is on or off path
[16:11:46] <admcd> natfw/mipv6 - xiaming fu
[16:12:02] <admcd> - might require some nat/fw modifications to allow some aggregation of rules
[16:13:16] <admcd> gabor bajko: in draft you state that mipv6 signalling is dropped, why do you think that nsis will work if mipv6 is dropped?
[16:13:48] <admcd> xiaoming: if nsis is aware then at least nsis can traverse
[16:14:14] <admcd> john: 3GPP2 has been asking for some MIP extensions to NAT/FW NSLP - have to authors of this draft looked into this?
[16:14:32] <admcd> Hannes: this document does more than 3gpp2 need
[16:15:03] <admcd> martin: this work should be heavily aligned with 3gpp2 needs and mobile ip wg
[16:15:45] --- shivanajay has left
[16:16:15] <admcd> run out of time - authors of dropped presentations should send e-mail to list
[16:16:28] <christian.dickmann> have a nice day
[16:17:01] <rbless> see you...
[16:17:24] <rbless> only virtual blue sheets for jabber rooms... :-)
[16:17:27] --- Martin has left: Logged out
[16:18:09] --- toyokkie has left
[16:19:00] --- christian.dickmann has left
[16:19:32] --- rbless has left
[16:20:04] --- HannesTschofenig has left: Replaced by new connection
[16:35:17] --- admcd has left
[16:36:28] --- elwynd has left
[16:58:05] --- shivanajay has joined
[17:04:54] --- elwynd has joined
[17:15:08] --- LOGGING STARTED
[17:20:18] --- shivanajay has joined
[17:28:46] --- shivanajay has left
[19:30:15] --- HannesTschofenig has joined
[19:30:33] --- HannesTschofenig has left