Re: Call for adoption confirmation: draft-seite-dmm-rg-multihoming-02

Hi Jouni,

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Jouni Korhonen <[email protected]> wrote:
> Behcet,
>
> 12/2/2015, 11:02 AM, Behcet Sarikaya kirjoitti:
>>
>> Hi Jouni,
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Jouni Korhonen <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> As an individual contributor I support the adoption of this I-D. MCoA is
>>> a
>>> feature that we still lack..
>>>
>>
>> Are you sure?
>>
>> MCoA is solved in Netext Flow Mobility draft,
>>
>> draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-14
>>
>> is the latest draft.
>
>
> Sorry for my improper wording regarding which part of the MCoA I meant. I
> don't see how draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-14 would handle the case of
> registration when the Proxy-CoAs are from the same MAG.

I wonder why would that be needed?
MN doesn't need it.
So this draft seems to be addressing a non-problem.

Regards,

Behcet
> The netext draft
> specifically states Proxy-CoAs are from different MAGs.
>
> But it was a good thing you brought this up. The two I-Ds need to be in
> sync.
>
>>
>> BTW there was an issue in WG adoption call in IETF 93 in Yokohama. The
>
>
> IETF 94 I presume.. AFAIR we did not ask for adoption in IETF 93.
>
>> chair asked only those who accept. The chair unfortunately did not ask
>> those who oppose.
>>
>> As you know, if the chair wishes to ask a single question then the
>> right one is any opposes.
>
>
> Obviously you are right here but I cannot really comment on this what
> happened in Yokohama since I was not on site or not even participating
> remotely.
>
> Anyway, all adoption calls are confirmed on the mailing list and the "sense
> of the room" during the meeting merely serves as informative quidance for
> chairs.
>
> - Jouni
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Behcet
>>>
>>> The document itself still needs quite a bit of work. For example, I
>>> wonder
>>> if the caption for Figure 2 is correct. Also, Section 4.1. option fiels
>>> descriptions are somewhat broken it seems. And so on multiple small nits
>>> like unexpanded acronyms etc. However, these are mainly editorials. I
>>> have
>>> no problem with the technical solution.
>>>
>>> - Jouni
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 11/25/2015, 8:22 AM, Dapeng Liu kirjoitti:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> In IETF94, we initiated the call for adoption for the draft:
>>>> draft-seite-dmm-rg-multihoming-02
>>>> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-seite-dmm-rg-multihoming-02>:
>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-seite-dmm-rg-multihoming-02
>>>> Seems have got sufficient support during the meeting. We'd like to
>>>> confirm the call for adoption in the mailing list for 2 weeks.
>>>> Please send your opinion and comments to the list before December 9.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> ------
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Dapeng&Jouni
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> ------
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Dapeng Liu
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> dmm mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dmm mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm