Subject: Re: [Softwires] Call for presentations for the interim meeting

From: "Dan Wing" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 16:37:19 -0700

> -----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: Yong Cui <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 20:39:28 +0800

Thanks so much, Dan.
Hope you can join the interim meeting.

Yong

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Wing <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 16:37:19 -0700
To: 'Alain Durand' <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>, Yong Cui
<[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [Softwires] Call for presentations for the interim meeting

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:42:36 +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

>> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] 
>> On Behalf Of Alain Durand
>> 'stateless solutions'. If you'd like to present there, please send 
>> the chairs a note by Friday this week.
>
>going to move forward.  To do that, we need comparisons so we can make 
>educated and informed decisions.  Documents like 
>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, 
>Wishing for a fruitful Softwire interim meeting, -d