Le 21 juil. 2011 à 17:48, Alain Durand a écrit :

> 
> On Jul 21, 2011, at 11:26 AM, Wojciech Dec wrote:
> 
>> So is stateless (apparently), yet the agenda seems to prefer to
>> generously assign time to everything but this topic, which by many
>> accounts is what the WG is very interested in discussing. It also
>> seems that I'm not the the only one thinking that this does not look
>> quite reasonable...
>> 
>> -Wojciech
> 
> items related to stateless are #5, #6. #7, #8, #9 and #19 for a total of 55mm 
> out of 150min

Yes, but among these 55 mn, 40 mn are to discuss motivations while the 
consensus, on the discussion list, is clear that 
draft-operators-softwire-stateless-4v6-motivation expresses well why the work 
on solutions should start.
(Incidentally, if the chairs have much to say about motivations that wasn't 
expressed on the list, having a document well before the meeting would be 
appreciated.)

Compared to these 40 min, 5 mn for each of the major ID's on solutions is 
dramatically disproportionate.

Thank you for what you can do.
RD


> This does not quite look like assigning time to everything but this topic.
> 
> Alain.
> _______________________________________________
> 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