[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

draft-nakibly-v6ops-tunnel-loops discussion

To: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
Subject: draft-nakibly-v6ops-tunnel-loops discussion
From: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 10:41:52 -0700
In-reply-to: <4C45171D.8090506@gmail.com>
References: <1975C274-CE6B-4A20-B6EE-87CE995CA8E6@cisco.com> <4C45171D.8090506@gmail.com>

On Jul 19, 2010, at 8:25 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> The draft doesn't recommend a choice of technique. I think that for the work to go forward, the WG would need to agree on a recommendation. Otherwise, the world will shrug its shoulders.

Following up on Brian's excellent review. Let's discuss this. In view of draft-arkko-ipv6-transition-guidelines and draft-ietf-v6ops-tunnel-security-concerns, do we need this draft? Should we prefer it to one of the others? Is there something specific we would like this document to recommend?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: draft-nakibly-v6ops-tunnel-loops discussion
  - From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>

References:
- Re: draft-nakibly-v6ops-tunnel-loops review
  - From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>

Prev by Date: Re: draft-kawamura-ipv6-isp-listings-00.txt
Next by Date: RE: Review of draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-12
Previous by thread: RE: draft-nakibly-v6ops-tunnel-loops review
Next by thread: Re: draft-nakibly-v6ops-tunnel-loops discussion
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread