Re: New Version Notification for draft-koodli-ipv6-in-mobile-networks-02

[Rajeev Koodli <rkoodli@cisco.com>]

I pointed out earlier that it is Informational (I did not change the type in
xml2rfc template), and that Standards Track is an error.
Please see previous versions.

Thanks,

-Rajeev



On 4/16/10 1:32 PM, "Behcet Sarikaya" <behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
>> To: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya@ieee.org>
>> Cc: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
>> Sent: Fri, April 16, 2010 3:16:05 PM
>> Subject: Re: New Version Notification for
>> draft-koodli-ipv6-in-mobile-networks-02
>> 
>> All things are possible. The question is what the right thing to do is.
>> Speaking 
>> for myself, this seems like a better fit to v6ops than 6man, as it talks
>> about 
>> operational deployment of IPv6 rather than maintenance of IPv6 itself. That
>> said, I'm looking for a supporting consensus. What I read so far today
>> suggests 
>> that there is sufficient consensus.
> 
> Another point: I hear people agreeing on this draft as informational. However
> the draft itself is going for standards track.
> 
> There is disagreement right there.
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Behcet
> 
> 
>       
>