Subject: [Hipsec] NAT traversal drafts

From: Gonzalo Camarillo <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 23:17:57 +0300

Folks,

we have been asked by Miika whether or not he can submit a new revision 
of his NAT traversal draft as a WG item, given all the discussions on 
the list and the fact that there are currently two approaches documented 
in two different drafts on the table.

At this point, we believe that Miika should go ahead and submit the 
revision that has been discussed on the list as a WG item so that it is 
properly archived. Of course, that does not mean that the WG cannot 
change its mind and decide to go for a different approach at some point. 
It just ensures that the draft is properly archived.

Regarding the technical discussions on both approaches, it is 
unfortunate that when this topic started getting traction on the list, 
it was already too late to request a slot to meet in Chicago. Therefore, 
we will need to continue these discussions on the list for the time 
being. In any case, we may try and organize a small ad-hoc meeting in 
Chicago to discuss this issue. Please, send an email to the chairs if 
you would be interested in actively participating (i.e., no tourists 
allowed) in such an ad-hoc meeting.

Cheers,

Gonzalo
HIP co-chair

_______________________________________________
Hipsec mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec

---

From: Gonzalo Camarillo <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 11:15:31 +0300

Folks,

> allowed) in such an ad-hoc meeting.

given that very few people showed interest in such an ad-hoc, we will 
finally not organize it. In any case, I suggest folks attend the ICE 
tutorial to get familiar with that technology.

Cheers,

Gonzalo