Margaret Wasserman wrote: > Before folks go and do a lot of additional work to update > draft-ietf-ipv6-cellular-host-00.txt based on our discussions, > I think we have to answer a fundamental question: > > Should the WG publish an informational RFC detailing the IPv6 > requirements for cellular hosts? > > If so, how can we prevent the two most likely bad outcomes: > > - 3GPP (or other) folks thinking that this document > is an IETF standard? [May be handled by > a strongly worded disclaimer in the document?] > - Everyone with an agenda attempting to publish a > similar document for their "special" > category of IPv6 host? [Can we just say 'no'?] > > I also think that we should start work on two standards-track > documents, both of which would use the current draft as > input: > > - An "IPv6 over <foo>" document for 3GPP links. > - A general "IPv6 Node Requirements" document. >
Thank you Margaret. You have made the point much more concisely than I did, and translating this doc into IPv6 over foo is exactly what needs to happen. Tony -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
