multi6%20Working%20Group

1
multi6 Working Group

• IETF-61, Washington D.C
• November 8-12, 2004

2
Agenda - November 9 (1/2)

• Administrivia 5 minutes
• Agenda Bashing 5 minutes
• WG document status (chairs) 5
  minutes
• (extra time if significant Last Call or IESG
  issues arise)
• draft-ietf-multi6-multihoming-threats-01.txt
• With IESG
• draft-ietf-multi6-v4-multihoming-02.txt
  
• WG Last Call ended Nov. 3
• draft-ietf-multi6-things-to-think-about-00.txt
  
• WG Last Call ended Nov. 3
• draft-ietf-multi6-architecture-02.txt
  
• WG Last Call ended Nov. 3

3
Agenda - November 9 (2/2)

• Design team- presentations and discussion 3 hours
  total
• General report from design team (Erik Nordmark)
  10 min
• Multihoming L3 Shim Approach (Erik Nordmark)
  30 min
• draft-nordmark-multi6dt-shim-00.txt
• Hash Based Addresses (HBA) (Marcelo Bagnulo) 30
  min
• draft-bagnulo-multi6dt-hba-00.txt
• Functional decomposition of the M6 protocol
  (Marcelo Bagnulo) 30 min
• draft-bagnulo-multi6dt-functional-dec-00.txt
  
• Failure Detection and Locator Selection in Multi6
  30 min
• draft-arkko-multi6dt-failure-detection-00.txt

4
Agenda - November 10

• Design team- presentations and discussion 3 hours
  total (Cont.)
• Multi6 Application Referral Issues (Erik
  Nordmark) 30 min
• draft-nordmark-multi6dt-refer-00.txt
• Final discussion on design team
  20 min
• draft-huitema-multi6-addr-selection-00.txt
  (Marcelo Bagnulo) 15 min
• draft-huitema-multi6-ingress-filtering-00.txt
• draft-arifumi-multi6-sas-policy-dist-00.txt
  (Arifumi Matsumoto) 15 min
• (also see draft-hirotaka-dhc-source-address-select
  ion-opt-00.txt and draft-arifumi-ipv6-nd-source-ad
  dress-select-01)
• Next steps for the WG (Chairs AD)
  until EOT

5
Administrivia - Note Well

• Any submission to the IETF intended by the
  Contributor for publication as all or part of an
  IETF
• Internet-Draft or RFC and any statement made
  within the context of an IETF activity is
• considered an "IETF Contribution". Such
  statements include oral statements in IETF
  sessions,
• as well as written and electronic communications
  made at any time or place, which are
• addressed to
• the IETF plenary session,
• any IETF working group or portion thereof,
• the IESG or any member thereof on behalf of the
  IESG,
• the IAB or any member thereof on behalf of the
  IAB,
• any IETF mailing list, including the IETF list
  itself,
• any working group or design team list, or any
  other list functioning under IETF auspices,
• the RFC Editor or the Internet-Drafts function
• All IETF Contributions are subject to the rules
  of RFC 3667 and RFC 3668. Statements made
• outside of an IETF session, mailing list or other
  function, that are clearly not intended to be
• input to an IETF activity, group or function, are
  not IETF Contributions in the context of this
• notice. Please consult RFC 3667 for details

6
Administrivia

• Volunteer scribe?
• Volunteer jabber scribe?
• Please state your name at the microphone!
• Please fill in and circulate the blue-sheets
• Presenters, please give presentation on Kurtis
  USB memory stick

7
Agenda bashing
8
WG Document status

• draft-ietf-multi6-multihoming-threats-01.txt
• With IESG
• draft-ietf-multi6-v4-multihoming-02.txt
  
• WG Last Call ended Nov. 3
• draft-ietf-multi6-things-to-think-about-00.txt
  
• WG Last Call ended Nov. 3
• draft-ietf-multi6-architecture-02.txt
  
• WG Last Call ended Nov. 3

9
Next Steps for the WG
10
Outcome from the DT

• Question to the Working group
• Do we agree that the way forward is the direction
  and work produced by the DT?
• Modulo the missing pieces (including choosing
  site-exit routers)

11
Next Steps for the WG

• Multi6 have come a long way
• All milestones documents are either at the IESG
  or very close
• Some work remains
• Re-iterate DT documents
• Complete WG milestones
• Last milestone suggests that we need to produce a
  solution architecture document

12
Proposal from the chairs

• Complete the work in multi6 including the
  architecture document
• Do not publish the documents from the DT as RFCs
  but accept as WG documents
• Publish the solution architecture document as an
  informational RFC, or kick it over the wall?
• Close multi6 down
• Before 03/05, charter a new WG in the Internet
  Area
• Alternatively, complete the architecture document
  here
• Develop protocols, APIs? for the solution

13
Question to the WG

• Do we agree to charter a new working group in the
  Internet Area?
• Do we agree to close down multi6 when work done?
• Do we agree on the need for a solution
  architecture document?