Jari, AFAIK, no DHCP+PANA call flow which has been matched the DSLF requirements has been articulated or discussed. Discussion of such an integrated call flow should be the minimal threshold for such a response.
Also, since the DSLF is well aware of PANA: http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/int-area/current/msg01127.html a response without such an analysis would at best convey no new information. More realistically, such a response would make it seem like the IETF just isn't listening. Eric > From: Alper Yegin, December 05, 2007 9:01 PM > > Hi Jari, > > DSLF's May 25 liaison that stated: > > "We are not currently aware of a solution specified in the > industry that meets our requirements. Can you advise us if > you have a specified solution or whether a suitable solution > is under your consideration." > > I think what we can do in our response is to notify DSLF that > IETF PANA WG was chartered for this problem space and the > PANA protocol specification is approved by IETF for > publication as a Proposed Standard. > > Can we please include that in our response to DSLF along with > whatever else would be said about the past int-area discussions? > > As for the detailed requirement analysis, this is something > we already started doing in PANA WG. In order not to delay > your liaison letter, you could mention that requirements > analysis is in progress. That analysis should not hold us > from sharing the aforementioned facts. > > > Regards, > > Alper > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Int-area mailing list > [email protected] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area > _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
