Re: Multi6 next steps - consensus call

Eliot Lear was the only person to comment, somewhat disagreeing
tactically with items 3 and 4, but not with the intent to do
the work in the Internet Area. The chairs take this as a consensus
to open discussion with the Area Directors, as well as
urging the design team to tidy up their drafts (item 1) and
draft the solution architecture (item 2).

    Brian + Kurtis

Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Multi6 people,
> 
> At the meetings this week, the design team drafts were discussed,
> and consensus in the room was positive for the following questions:
> 
> 1. Do we agree that the way forward is the direction and
>    work produced by the design team [modulo the missing pieces,
>    including choosing site-exit routers]?
> 
> 2. Do we agree on the need for a solution architecture document?
> 
> 3. Do we agree to recommend a new working group in the Internet Area
>    to follow up the design team approach?
> 
> 4. Do we agree to close down multi6 when its current work is done?
> 
> If you *disagree* with any of the above, please respond to the
> list, with a short explanation, in the next few days.
> 
>    Brian + Kurtis
>    co-chairs
> 
> PS: the drafts in question are
>     Multihoming Level 3 Shim Approach
>     (draft-nordmark-multi6dt-shim-00.txt)
>     Hash Based Addresses (HBA)
>     (draft-bagnulo-multi6dt-hba-00.txt)
>     Functional decomposition of the M6 protocol
>     (draft-bagnulo-multi6dt-functional-dec-00.txt)
>     Failure Detection and Locator Selection in Multi6
>     (draft-arkko-multi6dt-failure-detection-00.txt)
>     Multi6 Application Referral Issues
>     (draft-nordmark-multi6dt-refer-00.txt)
> 
> 
> 
>