Subject: [v6ops] Preliminary agenda posted

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 13:54:17 -0400

A first-cut agenda has been posted at
	http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/agenda/v6ops.html

I need to apologize to the people behind ten drafts. We currently have posted

	draft-matsushima-v6ops-transition-experience-02.txt
	draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming-04.txt
	draft-fling-v6ops-hybrid-bridged-routed-00.txt
	draft-andrews-v6ops-6to4-router-option-02.txt
	draft-chown-v6ops-call-to-arms-03.txt
	draft-gont-v6ops-ra-guard-evasion-01.txt
	draft-ietf-v6ops-v6-aaaa-whitelisting-implications-06.txt
	draft-yang-v6ops-space6-icp-00.txt
	draft-sarikaya-v6ops-prefix-delegation-07.txt
	draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic-05.txt
	draft-gashinsky-v6nd-enhance-00.txt
	draft-templin-v6ops-isops-12.txt
	draft-gundavelli-v6ops-pmipv6-address-reservations-00.txt
	draft-chen-v6ops-ipv6-bearer-network-trials-00.txt
	draft-elkins-6man-ipv6-diagnostic-header-00.txt
	draft-hilliard-v6ops-ipv6-discard-prefix-00.txt
	draft-kuarsingh-wireline-incremental-ipv6-00.txt
	draft-tan-v6ops-fast6-aaa-01.txt
	draft-deng-v6ops-aplusp-experiment-results-01.txt
	draft-jjmb-v6ops-comcast-ipv6-experiences-01.txt
	draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-bis-01.txt
	draft-chen-v6ops-nat64-cpe-02.txt
	draft-yang-v6ops-fast6-pppoe-01.txt
	draft-yang-v6ops-fast6-tools-selection-01.txt
	draft-li-v6ops-load-balancing-requirement-01.txt
	draft-ietf-v6ops-happy-eyeballs-03.txt
	draft-keranen-ipv6day-measurements-01.txt
	draft-sunq-v6ops-contents-transition-01.txt
	draft-dec-stateless-4v6-02.txt
	draft-chown-v6ops-address-accountability-01.txt

which is to say "30 drafts". We have 270 minutes, 150 on Tuesday and 120 on Thursday. In the agenda, I have given slots to 20 discussions, three of which are reports on IPv6 Day that don't have drafts behind them; that pretty much means 13 minutes each, including switchover time. The other thirteen drafts didn't make the cut.

"Making the cut", as we discussed in IETF-80, involves traction on the list or the chairs deciding it's important. Joel and I think the World IPv6 Day is timely and important, and solicited talks from various quarters. The other drafts on the agenda are drafts that have had discussion on the list, got high marks in the survey I ran in early June, or by some other argument seem operationally valuable. The ones that didn't make the cut had negative traction on the list or no list discussion at all, or is targeted to a different working group such as opsawg.

If someone thinks we have misjudged something, please comment to the chairs. We'll finalize the agenda next week.

---

From: Joel Jaeggli <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 11:07:04 -0700

> "Making the cut", as we discussed in IETF-80, involves traction on the list or the chairs deciding it's important. Joel and I think the World IPv6 Day is timely and important, and solicited talks f…

When we survey sentiment again, drafts for which we do not have space in the agenda will be represented.

> We'll finalize the agenda next week.

Thanks
joel