Ted, I support the move to PS, and agree with the characterisation you
presented.

Thanks,
Wojciech.

On 11 November 2014 22:11, Ted Lemon <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dear softwire participants,
>
> As we've gotten closer to finally finishing the stateless address-sharing
> suite of softwire specifications, I've had to explain what happened to a
> number of different people, both in the directorates and on the IESG, and
> even to nomcom.  As a consequence I've had to do a lot of thinking about
> why things wound up the way they did, and whether what happened was the
> right outcome.
>
> As a result of the directorate reviews and the IESG review, it became
> clear that the plan to advance MAP-T as experimental didn't make sense.
> The three solutions, MAP-E, MAP-T and Lightweight 4over6 actually make a
> lot of sense when presented together.   Because of this there is no reason
> that one should be experimental and the other two standards track.
>
> I would therefore like the working group to consider changing the proposed
> status of MAP-T to Proposed Standard.   I think this would be a less
> confusing outcome.   If the working group agrees, we would go through a
> second IETF last call and then advance the document.
>
> I have not made the same suggestion with respect to 4RD because it
> actually is quite different from the other three documents.   This is not
> intended as an editorial comment about 4RD: rather, it's simply that I
> think the three documents together offer a good suite of solutions that can
> be understood and implemented together, whereas 4RD is essentially its own
> solution.   I think the working group has already chosen to advance the
> MAP-style lightweight solutions, and it would actually be confusing to
> advance 4RD as a separate standard solution.
>
> Suresh and Cui Yong will be asking the working group to weigh in on this
> issue, and then assuming no blocking objections are raised we will re-do
> the IETF last call for map-t as a proposed standard.
>
> Thanks!
> _______________________________________________
> Softwires mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
>
_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

Reply via email to