Re: issue status

At 5:46 PM +0300 5/29/05, Jari Arkko wrote:
>The issue list has five pending issues, some of which are now
>being closed. This e-mail attempts to summarize the status
>of those five issues:
>
>3 (nat) -- My suggestion is that we close this issue at
>               the level of detail we have now, and open new
>               issues during protocol work, if necessary. See
>    http://www.machshav.com/pipermail/mobike/2005-May/000807.html
>
>6 (rr) -- closed. See
>    http://www.machshav.com/pipermail/mobike/2005-May/000806.html
>
>11 (window) -- closed, but here too we may open new issues
>    when we see two alternative proposals here, now just one
>    proposal available. See also
>    http://www.machshav.com/pipermail/mobike/2005-May/000778.html
>
>19 (same addresses in both directions) -- pending, discussion to
>     end by Friday. See
>    http://www.machshav.com/pipermail/mobike/2005-May/000805.html
>
>20 (who decides) -- closed
>    http://www.machshav.com/pipermail/mobike/2005-May/000804.html

Wearing my co-chair hat, I agree with Jari's reading of the consensus 
of the WG on all five issues. Two notes:

- The sub-issues of #3 (NATs) may get opened again as we explore the 
protocol that comes out of this, but the long list of resolutions 
should be the starting model for our work.

- The consensus on the extended discussion of issue 19 was to have 
the same address pairs in both directions. There was a bit of 
interest in re-exploring this once we have a protocol in front of us.

With that, it seems like all the closable issues have been closed.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium