RE: WG Review: IPv6 Operations (v6ops)

["Hesham Soliman (EAB)" <hesham.soliman@era.ericsson.se>]

  > Are you talking about the BGP Tunneling specification?

=> Yes.

  > 
  > Even if it were absolutely necessary to have some sort of BGP
  > extensions to make shared IPv4/IPv6 networks work (about which
  > there is apparently some disagreement), why would we want to
  > standardize BGP extensions in an OPS area WG, instead of doing
  > it within the WG responsible for BGP (the idr WG).

=> I don't care why or where it is done, why was it in 
the ops area to start with ?? 
I only care about seeing it done.

  > 
  > Based on the v6ops charter, the v6ops WG might identify a need in
  > this area, but then we would work within the idr WG to devise
  > an appropriate solution.

=> Fine, as I said I don't care where it's done, I want
to make sure it's not dropped, and it's very easy for a WG
to drop a spec without trying to help its authors find 
the right place.

Hesham