Subject: Re: [Softwires] Softwire interim meeting preliminary agenda

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 11:13:44 +0800

Hello Chairs,

I fully agree with Dan's proposal for bashing interim meeting agenda on
the following two regards, and thereby raising 3 questions towards
current agenda somewhere where against these two regards.
 
Regard 1: Promote stuffs that we can make educated and informed
decisions.

Q1: Why
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-softwire-stateless-requiremen
ts-00, is off the agenda list? 
IMO, this is something exactly deals with fundamental requirements for
the design of all stateless 4/6 solutions, thereby helping us moving
forward to decide working direction.

Q2: Why
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-deng-v6ops-aplusp-experiment-results-01
, is off the agenda list? 
which would offer first-hand information we educated and learnt from
pioneer stateless 4/6 solution deployment.

Regard 2: Focus on comparisons between approaches instead of going into
bits of *only one* of them.

Q3: Why
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite-01,
is on the list, while the
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-zhou-softwire-b4-nat-02.txt, which works
on exactly the same direction, is off the list?

Curious about the reasons and thanks to your answers in advance!

Cheers,
Xiaohong

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
>> On Behalf Of Alain Durand
>> Sent: Monday, August 22, 2011 8:37 AM
>> To: [email-masked]; Yong Cui
>> Subject: [Softwires] Call for presentations for the interim meeting
>> 
>> As we mentioned earlier, the softwire interim meeting will focus on 
>> 'stateless solutions'. If you'd like to present there, please send 
>> the chairs a note by Friday this week.
>
>After seeing a bunch of replies to this request, I have a feeling of 
>unease.
>
>We -- the IETF -- need to reach some decisions on the direction we're 
>going to move forward.  To do that, we need comparisons so we can make 
>educated and informed decisions.  Documents like 
>draft-bsd-softwire-stateless-port-index-analysis and
>draft-dec-stateless-4v6 are on the right track -- I hope we can discuss

>them in more detail prior to the interim.
>
>Can the chairs and presenters please consider spending a majority of 
>the interim meeting discussing the merits of different approaches, 
>rather than presentations of 
>how-this-Internet-Draft-encodes-bits-on-the-wire?
>
>Wishing for a fruitful Softwire interim meeting, -d

---

From: Alain Durand <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 20:00:48 -0700

Q1: Why
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-softwire-stateless-requiremen>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-softwire-stateless-requiremen

This starting point of the discussion is taken as a given

Q2: Why
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-deng-v6ops-aplusp-experiment-results-01>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-deng-v6ops-aplusp-experiment-results-01
, is off the agenda list?
which would offer first-hand information we educated and learnt from
pioneer stateless 4/6 solution deployment.

Yes, this one should be discussed on the 1st session

Q3: Why
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite-01>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite-01,
is on the list, while the
<http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-zhou-softwire-b4-nat-02.txt>http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-zhou-softwire-b4-nat-02.txt, which works
on exactly the same direction, is off the list?

I might have missed it but I did not receive a request from the authors of this draft to present it.

Alain.

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 15:32:56 +0800

Thank you, Alain. 

|
|Q3: Why
|<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds
|-lite-01>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cui-softwire-b4-trans
|lated-ds-lite-01,
|is on the list, while the
|<http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-zhou-softwire-b4-nat-02.txt>htt
|p://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-zhou-softwire-b4-nat-02.txt, which 
|works on exactly the same direction, is off the list?
|
|I might have missed it but I did not receive a request from 
|the authors of this draft to present it.

There was a request for IETF81. Sorry if I understood wrong that it would be automatically postponed from the last meeting to interim meeting.

If I may, hereby request a slot for http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-zhou-softwire-b4-nat-02.txt

|Alain.

Xiaohong
|