Re: Call for WG Adoption of a "current practices and gap analysis" document

Dear all,

After going through the 2 documents, my opinion is that [1] has an 
improved technical completeness (e.g. number of mobility protocols 
considered for best practices description, and clear identification of 
respective limitations) against that of ]2}. It also seems to have a 
more logical and consensual structure, in line with what is expectable 
from a "Current practices and Gap Analysis" document.

For these reasons, I support the adoption of [1].

Best regards,
Sérgio



On 12/19/2012 08:25 PM, Jouni Korhonen wrote:
> Folks,
>
> We are unfortunately slipping our milestone, our (chairs) apologies for that. The next step is to select a "current practices and gap analysis" document to serve as the basis for the future WG document. We consider two documents on this topic to choose from:
>
> [1] draft-zuniga-dmm-gap-analysis-02
> [2] draft-liu-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-01
>
> and we as a WG need to decide which one is going to form the _basis_ for the WG document.
>
> Please voice your preference either for [1] or for [2] on the mailing list. We would appreciate if you can also provide a one-liner justification for your selection. The chairs will determine if there is (rough) consensus from active WG participants to proceed with selecting one document against the other.
>
> The call starts today 19th Dec 2012 and ends by 10th Jan 2013. We have a longer three week call now due the holiday season in between.
>
> - Jouni & Julien
> _______________________________________________
> dmm mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm