RE: next steps?

["Soliman, Hesham" <H.Soliman@flarion.com>]

There is a problem statement that MIP6 is adopting. We haven't
submitted the WG draft yet but it's draft-tsirtsis at the moment.

Hesham

 > -----Original Message-----
 > From: Alexandru Petrescu [mailto:Alexandru.Petrescu@motorola.com]
 > Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 7:53 PM
 > To: Pekka Savola
 > Cc: Soliman, Hesham; miptrans@ops.ietf.org; Thomas Narten
 > Subject: Re: next steps?
 > 
 > 
 > Pekka Savola wrote:
 > > While it's still not too late to get the "last minute BoF" 
 > with probably 
 > > a bad slot, I'm a bit skeptic whether the folks in here have a 
 > > sufficient vision on what work is on the table.
 > > 
 > > - discuss the scenarios framework draft (needs revision) ?
 > > - look at certain scenarios (most important?) in particular?
 > >   * presentation of requirements from some operators?
 > > - try to deduct which cases are interesting (now) and which not?
 > > - what is the problem statement for the work?
 > > - figure out where to work on the protocols in the end?
 > > 
 > > AFAIK, MIPv6 has already taken a document as WG item, so 
 > some of these 
 > > may already be moot.
 > 
 > What document do you refer to?  Does MIP6 WG has an item on 
 > MIP6-in-v4?
 > 
 > Alex
 > 
 > 

===========================================================
This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use
 of the intended recipient.  Any review or distribution by others is strictly
 prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient please contact the sender
 and delete all copies.
===========================================================