RE: (multi6) Salt Lake meeting agenda

["Michel Py" <michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us>]

Thomas and multi6 folk,

>> There has been a fair amount of recent discussion on the requirements
>> document, but none on the ID that was submitted.

I believe it is because, thanks to Joe, we had a preview of what was
being submitted and discussed the preview and not the actual submission.

>> Is this one ready for WG Last Call? I'd like to see everyone read it
for
>> Salt Lake City and all remaining issues out on the table.

I think that draft-ietf-multi6-multihoming-requirements-02.txt is ready
for WG Last Call.

IMHO there are two points where semantics could be debated, 3.1.4 Policy
(that has been debated a while ago) and 3.2.6 Cooperation where I think
we need a clear definition of the word "cooperation".

>> FYI, I also count the following documents that are related to the
>> multi6 effort:
>> draft-py-multi6-mhtp-01.txt
>> draft-bagnulo-multi6-survey6-00.txt
>> draft-huitema-multi6-hosts-00.txt
>> draft-ramki-multi6-nlmp-00.txt
>> draft-hain-ipv6-pi-addr-01.txt
>> draft-hain-ipv6-pi-addr-use-01.txt

I have included a section "compliance with the requirements" in my own
text, and Christian did something similar in his. I encourage authors of
solutions drafts to do the same.

Michel