From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 15 04:38:20 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B4FE3A6995; Wed, 15 Oct 2008 04:38:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87DB63A697F for ; Wed, 15 Oct 2008 04:38:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.528 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.528 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.071, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3Xcekenxqdww for ; Wed, 15 Oct 2008 04:38:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 841853A6893 for ; Wed, 15 Oct 2008 04:38:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.piuha.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B3471986D9; Wed, 15 Oct 2008 14:39:16 +0300 (EEST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by smtp.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50CDF198681; Wed, 15 Oct 2008 14:39:16 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <48F5D686.6010204@piuha.net> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 14:39:50 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080925) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: autoconf@ietf.org X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Cc: Ross Callon Subject: [Autoconf] Input to the IESG on draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Dear all, There are several ways to publish RFCs. One method is to take the document through a working group and the IETF process, and publish it as an RFC when last call and IESG review have been completed. Another method is called the Independent Submission method, and it allows people to submit documents to the RFC Editor directly, without any IETF review. Given the lack of review at the IETF, these are not standards of any sort. However, they can still be valuable contributions and they are often used, for instance, to document vendor specific protocols or someone's thoughts on some topic. These documents do get some review from the IESG, however, to ensure, for instance, that they do not make IANA allocations that would require taking the document through the IETF process. Where there is some overlap with work in an IETF WG, the IESG has a variety of steps that it can recommend to the RFC editor, such as delaying publication so that the WG can first complete its work, and/or adding an IESG note to clarify the status of the document. Fred Templin has submitted a document through the Independent Submissions process on his views about on MANET architecture, autoconfiguration, and use of DHCP. The IESG needs to make a decision on what to do about this document. Fred's document does not define a protocol or allocate any new IANA values, so from that perspective there is no reason for the IESG to recommend that it be delayed or not published. However, it does have overlap with the chartered work of AUTOCONF, namely with the architecture document. In these cases, the IESG can use its judgment to determine whether publishing the work will be harmful to the WGs progress, or to the industry. We'd like to collect input from the WG on this matter. If there are no objections we are inclined to recommend that the RFC Editor publish Fred's document. Please respond by Tuesday, Oct 21st. Note that we are not asking for technical feedback on Fred's document, or whether you believe its contents are correct or incorrect. If you have that type of input, please send it to Fred directly. Finally, and more importantly we would also like the AUTOCONF WG to deliver its own architecture document as soon as possible. We know that Thomas and others are working on a new version, but the ADs want to stress that progress on this document is crucial for the continued existence of the WG. When the new version appears, we need substantial help from the WG to review and progress it. Jari Arkko and Ross Callon _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 15 09:31:41 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05BF728C29B; Wed, 15 Oct 2008 09:31:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C15D23A6B81; Wed, 15 Oct 2008 09:31:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WiW2InC8D0+a; Wed, 15 Oct 2008 09:31:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from blv-smtpout-01.boeing.com (blv-smtpout-01.boeing.com [130.76.32.69]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FD873A6AF6; Wed, 15 Oct 2008 09:31:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slb-av-01.boeing.com (slb-av-01.boeing.com [129.172.13.4]) by blv-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id m9FGWFes028030 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 15 Oct 2008 09:32:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slb-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by slb-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id m9FGWEhm003274; Wed, 15 Oct 2008 09:32:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from XCH-NWBH-11.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwbh-11.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.55.84]) by slb-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id m9FGW8kR003069; Wed, 15 Oct 2008 09:32:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.54.35]) by XCH-NWBH-11.nw.nos.boeing.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 15 Oct 2008 09:32:10 -0700 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 09:32:09 -0700 Message-ID: <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A10517EDDF@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: RANGER Thread-Index: AckuLWrQweJ2zqZ5Tj6e+/Xuj9HQuAAqyL2A From: "Templin, Fred L" To: "Internet Area" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Oct 2008 16:32:10.0591 (UTC) FILETIME=[926E0EF0:01C92EE3] X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: SMEX-8.0.0.1285-5.500.1027-16218.001 X-TM-AS-Result: No--3.739300-0.000000-31 X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: Yes X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No Cc: IPv6 Operations , autoconf@ietf.org, manet , ipv6@ietf.org, DHC WG Subject: [Autoconf] RANGER X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org This message is to introduce a new Internet-Draft titled: "Routing and Addressing in Next-Generation EnteRprises (RANGER)" RANGER is an architectural framework that uses well known (and in some cases widely-deployed) functional elements. RANGER is not a technical specification in itself, however it provides applicability analysis for the combination of existing and emerging technical specifications. In particular, it outlines an "enterprise-within-enterprise" framework that addresses issues such as routing scaling, IPv6/IPv4 coexistence, link MTU diversity, mobile ad-hoc networking, autoconfiguration, etc. The RANGER enterprise network model supports cooperative operations between diverse organizations that may have competing interests. The model can therefore be applied to the global Internet itself. In order to reduce fragmentation, please post any follow-up comments or questions to the int-area and rrg lists only. Fred Templin fred.l.templin@boeing.com -----Original Message----- From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 11:45 AM To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action:draft-templin-ranger-00.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Routing and Addressing in Next-Generation EnteRprises (RANGER) Author(s) : F. Templin Filename : draft-templin-ranger-00.txt Pages : 17 Date : 2008-10-14 Enterprise networks will require support for both Internet protocol versions (IPv4 and IPv6) for an indeterminant period; perhaps even indefinitely. This is particularly true for existing enterprise networks that must introduce IPv6 without disruption of IPv4 services, but the same principles apply also to clean-slate deployments in new enterprises. Next-generation enterprises therefore require an architected solution for coordination of their internal routing and addressing plans for both IPv6 and IPv4. The RANGER architecture addresses these requirements. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-templin-ranger-00.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Thu Oct 16 01:37:29 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F9B03A6AA9; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 01:37:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B9D33A6AA9; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 01:37:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.273 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.273 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.026, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B5tPluzORwIf; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 01:37:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpsal.upv.es (marfik.cc.upv.es [158.42.249.14]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5F813A677D; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 01:37:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pop.upv.es (deneb.cc.upv.es [158.42.3.51]) by smtpsal.upv.es (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m9G8cNdw017271; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:38:23 +0200 Received: from smtp.upv.es (celaeno.cc.upv.es [158.42.249.55]) by pop.upv.es (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id m9G8cNG20425; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:38:23 +0200 (METDST) Received: from [158.42.146.208] (fboronat3.gnd.upv.es [158.42.146.208]) by smtp.upv.es (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m9G8cMDP004121; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:38:22 +0200 Message-ID: <48F6FD7E.7010800@dcom.upv.es> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:38:22 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fernando_Boronat_Segu=ED?= Organization: Universidad =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Polit=E9cnica_de_Valencia?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sam@ietf.org, tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu, autoconf@ietf.org, COMMSOFT@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG, tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu, sigmm@pi4.informatik.uni-mannheim.de, mycolleagues@grid.lrg.ufsc.br, mycolleagues-bounces@grid.lrg.ufsc.br Subject: [Autoconf] 2nd CfP: INTENSIVE 2009 | April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: fboronat@dcom.upv.es List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed" Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org I apologize if you receive several copies of this mail. Please consider to contribute to and/or forward to the appropriate = groups the following opportunity to submit and publish original = scientific results. Thank you Very Much =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D INTENSIVE 2009 | Call for Papers= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 2nd CALL FOR PAPERS, TUTORIALS, PANELS INTENSIVE 2009, The First International Conference on Intensive = Applications and Services April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain General page: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/INTENSIVE09.html Call for Papers: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/CfPINTENSIVE09.html Submission deadline: November 1, 2008 Submissions will be peer-reviewed, published by IEEE CPS, posted in IEEE = Digital Library, and indexed with the major indexes. Extended versions of selected papers will be published in IARIA = Journals: http://www.iariajournals.org Please note the Poster Forum special submission with on progress and = challenging ideas. INTENSIVE 2009 Special Areas (details in the CfP on site): Basics on IAS (Intensive Applications and Services) || Fundamentals on = IAS; Heuristics for relaxing IAS; Optimization on IAS; Coordinated = checkpointing and rollback in IAS; Approximation approach in IAS; = Suboptimal solutions in IAS; Distribution IAS; Pervasive parallelism IAS Communications intensive || Transaction IAS; Bandwidth IAS; Traffic IAS; = Broadcast and multicast IAS; Propagation IAS; Stream media intensive Process intensive || Resource IAS; Computation IAS; Memory IAS; Data = acquisition IAS; Data compression IAS; Replication intensive IAS; = Storage IAS; Access IAS; Image processing IAS Operational intensive || Cryptography IAS; Intrusion prevention IAS; = Deep packet inspection IAS; Reconfiguration IAS; Load-balancing IAS; = Buffering & cashing IAS; Performance IAS User intensive|| User interaction IAS; Multi-user IAS; User-adaptation IAS Technology intensive|| Mobility IAS; High-speed IAS; Intensive real-time = decoding Control intensive|| Message IAS; Monitoring IAS; Power IAS; Hardware for = IAS; Software for IAS; Middleware for IAS; Threat containment IAS Complex IAS || Bioinformatics computation; Large scale ehealth systems; = Pharmaceutical/drug computation; Weather forecast computation; = Earthquake simulations; Geo-spatial simulations; Spatial programs; = Real-time manufacturing systems; Transportation systems; Avionic = systems; Economic/financial systems; Electric-power systems; =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D General Chair Fernando Boronat, Integrated Management Coastal Research Institute, Spain Program Committee Chairs Hai Jin, Huazhong University of Science and Technology - Wuhan, China Milena Radenkovic, University of Nottingham, UK DJamel H. Sadok, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Brazil Marius Slavescu, IBM Toronto Lab, Canada Chieh-Yih Wan, Intel, USA Advisory Chairs Petre Dini, Cisco Systems, Inc., USA / Concordia University, Canada Hans-Dieter Ehrich, Institut f=FCr Informationssysteme/Technische = Universit=E4t Braunschweig, Germany Chih-Cheng Hung, Southern Polytechnic State University, USA Jaime Lloret Mauri, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain Jianhua Ma, Hosei University, Japan Simon Tsang, Telcordia Technologies, Inc. - Piscataway, USA =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Thu Oct 16 16:43:51 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 583523A693D; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 16:43:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7C4A3A693D for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 16:43:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.03 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.03 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.430, BAYES_05=-1.11, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, RCVD_IN_NJABL_PROXY=1.643, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iPhBCqyy72AX for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 16:43:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpsal.upv.es (marfik.cc.upv.es [158.42.249.14]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EDCB3A659B for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 16:43:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pop.upv.es (deneb.cc.upv.es [158.42.3.51]) by smtpsal.upv.es (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m9GNipTj022475 for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 01:44:51 +0200 Received: from smtp.upv.es (celaeno.cc.upv.es [158.42.249.55]) by pop.upv.es (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id m9GNipt00249 for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 01:44:51 +0200 (METDST) Received: from localhost (gomeisa.cc.upv.es [158.42.249.25]) by smtp.upv.es (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m9GNiowA004953 for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 01:44:50 +0200 Received: from 81.202.22.92.dyn.user.ono.com (81.202.22.92.dyn.user.ono.com [81.202.22.92]) by webmail.upv.es (IMP) with HTTP for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 01:44:50 +0200 Message-ID: <1224200690.48f7d1f2923c9@webmail.upv.es> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 01:44:50 +0200 From: Jaime Lloret Mauri To: autoconf@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.8 X-Originating-IP: 81.202.22.92 Subject: [Autoconf] 3rd CfP: ICNS 2009 | April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Please consider to contribute to and/or forward to the appropriate groups t= he following opportunity to submit and publish original scientific results. Apologies for cross-postings. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D ICNS 2009 | Call for Papers =3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D CALL FOR PAPERS, TUTORIALS, PANELS ICNS 2009, The Fifth International Conference on Networking and Services April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain General page: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/ICNS09.html Call for Papers: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/CfPICNS09.html Important deadlines: Submission (full paper) November 1, 2008 Authors notification December 5, 2008 Registration December 20, 2008 Camera ready December 25, 2008 Submissions will be peer-reviewed, published by IEEE CS Press, posted in IE= EE Digital Library, and indexed with the major indexes. Extended versions of selected papers will be published in IARIA Journals: http://www.iariajournals.org Please note the Poster Forum special submission with on progress and challe= nging ideas. ICNS 2009 Area Tracks are the following (details in the CfP on site): ENCOT: Emerging Network Communications and Technologies COMAN: Network Control and Management SERVI: Multi-technology service deployment and assurance NGNUS: Next Generation Networks and Ubiquitous Services MPQSI: Multi Provider QoS/SLA Internetworking GRIDNS: Grid Networks and Services EDNA: Emergency Services and Disaster Recovery of Networks and Applications IPv6DFI: Deploying the Future Infrastructure IPDy: Internet Packet Dynamics GOBS: GRID over Optical Burst Switching Networks =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D - ICNS General Chair Jaime Lloret Mauri, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain - ICNS 2009 Industry Chairs Kevin Y Ung, Boeing, USA Leo Lehmann, OFCOM, Switzerland Francisco Javier S=E1nchez, Administrador de Infraestructuras Ferroviarias = (ADIF), Spain - ICNS 2009 Technical Program Committee Chair Giancarlo Fortino, Universit=E0 della Calabria, Italy Salvador Sales, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain Feng Xia, Queensland University of Technology, Australia / Zhejiang Univers= ity, China - ICNS Advisory Chairs Wojciech Burakowski, Warsaw University of Technology, Poland Vicente Casares, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain Petre Dini, Cisco Systems, Inc., USA / Concordia University, Canada Xiaohua Jia, City University of Hong Kong - Kowloon, Hong Kong Manuel Sierra-P=E9rez, Universidad Polit=E9cnica de Madrid, Spain =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D -- = _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Fri Oct 17 02:28:38 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B80623A68A2; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 02:28:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9366A28C0E9 for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 02:28:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -8.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_INVITATION=-2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z3E9OP2lCama for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 02:28:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpsal.upv.es (marfik.cc.upv.es [158.42.249.14]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24ED63A63D2 for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 02:28:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pop.upv.es (deneb.cc.upv.es [158.42.3.51]) by smtpsal.upv.es (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m9H9TXs9011176; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 11:29:34 +0200 Received: from smtp.upv.es (celaeno.cc.upv.es [158.42.249.55]) by pop.upv.es (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id m9H9TXo11897; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 11:29:33 +0200 (METDST) Received: from localhost (meissa.cc.upv.es [158.42.249.24]) by smtp.upv.es (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m9H9TXw0031410; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 11:29:33 +0200 Received: from vpn245-82.vpns.upv.es (vpn245-82.vpns.upv.es [158.42.245.82]) by webmail.upv.es (IMP) with HTTP for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 11:29:33 +0200 Message-ID: <1224235773.48f85afd50e09@webmail.upv.es> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 11:29:33 +0200 From: Jaime Lloret Mauri To: autoconf@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.8 X-Originating-IP: 158.42.245.82 Cc: rafael.tomas@coit.es Subject: [Autoconf] 1st CFP: 1st Workshop LMPCNAP in ICNS 2009 | April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org INVITATION =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Please consider to contribute to and/or forward to the appropriate groups = the following opportunity to submit and publish original scientific or educatio= nal results. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D LMPCNAP 2009 | Call for Papers = =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D CALL FOR PAPERS, TUTORIALS, PANELS The first International Workshop on Learning Methodologies and Platforms us= ed in the Cisco Networking Academy Program (CNAP), LMPCNAP 2009 will be held duri= ng ICNS 2009 in April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain General page: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/LMPCNAP.html Submission deadline: November 1, 2008 Submissions will be peer-reviewed, published by IEEE CPS and posted in IEEE Digital Library (pending agreement). Extended versions of selected papers will be published in IARIA Journals: http://www.iariajournals.org Cisco Networking Academy Program is an education initiative that delivers information and communication technology skills to improve student=92s care= er around the world. Cisco Networking Academy provides online courses, interac= tive tools, and lab activities to help individuals develop the skills needed to = fill ICT positions in virtually every type of industry. It also provides numerous programs and resources to link students and alumni with potential employers. This innovative learning program that has more than 11,000 Academies spread world wide in more than 160 Countries with more than 472,000 students registered and more than 16,000 instructors. It realizes more than 25,000 online exams per day. The number of academies in the CNAP has been growing continuously during its 12 years of existence. The CCNA course has been translated in 10 different languages. This international workshop will serve as a forum for teachers and instruct= ors from the academia and the industry to exchange ideas. The topics could be on techniques, methodologies and applications, best practices, awareness and experiences as well as future trends and needs related to all aspects of education and technologies. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following topics: New learning methodologies. Blended learning. Online laboratories. Virtual laboratories. Remote laboratories. Learning strategies to enhance online courses. Learning Content adaptation for blended learning. Learning platforms and their compatibility with cisco.netacad.net. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D LMPCNAP 2009 General Chair Rafael Tomas, Mediterranean Cisco Academy Training Center (CATC), Spain LMPCNAP 2009 Technical Program Commitee chair Prof. Tomeu Serra, Universitat de les Illes Balears, Spain =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D -- = _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Fri Oct 17 08:47:00 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B8803A6AA9; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 08:47:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DC483A688A; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 08:46:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.275 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.275 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.024, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nCIolJVNUeOT; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 08:46:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpsal.upv.es (marfik.cc.upv.es [158.42.249.14]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A81203A6924; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 08:46:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pop.upv.es (deneb.cc.upv.es [158.42.3.51]) by smtpsal.upv.es (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m9HFlmvm031014; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 17:47:48 +0200 Received: from smtp.upv.es (celaeno.cc.upv.es [158.42.249.55]) by pop.upv.es (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id m9HFlmS24457; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 17:47:48 +0200 (METDST) Received: from [158.42.146.208] (fboronat3.gnd.upv.es [158.42.146.208]) by smtp.upv.es (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m9HFlkL7002914; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 17:47:46 +0200 Message-ID: <48F8B3A2.4090702@dcom.upv.es> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 17:47:46 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fernando_Boronat_Segu=ED?= Organization: Universidad =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Polit=E9cnica_de_Valencia?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: computational.science@lists.OptimaNumerics.com, discuss@ieeetcsc.org, autoconf@ietf.org, sam@ietf.org Subject: [Autoconf] 2nd CfP: INTENSIVE 2009 | April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: fboronat@dcom.upv.es List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed" Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org I apologize if you receive several copies of this mail. Please consider to contribute to and/or forward to the appropriate = groups the following opportunity to submit and publish original = scientific results. Thank you Very Much =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D INTENSIVE 2009 | Call for Papers= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 2nd CALL FOR PAPERS, TUTORIALS, PANELS INTENSIVE 2009, The First International Conference on Intensive = Applications and Services April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain General page: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/INTENSIVE09.html Call for Papers: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/CfPINTENSIVE09.html Submission deadline: November 1, 2008 Submissions will be peer-reviewed, published by IEEE CPS, posted in IEEE = Digital Library, and indexed with the major indexes. Extended versions of selected papers will be published in IARIA = Journals: http://www.iariajournals.org Please note the Poster Forum special submission with on progress and = challenging ideas. INTENSIVE 2009 Special Areas (details in the CfP on site): Basics on IAS (Intensive Applications and Services) || Fundamentals on = IAS; Heuristics for relaxing IAS; Optimization on IAS; Coordinated = checkpointing and rollback in IAS; Approximation approach in IAS; = Suboptimal solutions in IAS; Distribution IAS; Pervasive parallelism IAS Communications intensive || Transaction IAS; Bandwidth IAS; Traffic IAS; = Broadcast and multicast IAS; Propagation IAS; Stream media intensive Process intensive || Resource IAS; Computation IAS; Memory IAS; Data = acquisition IAS; Data compression IAS; Replication intensive IAS; = Storage IAS; Access IAS; Image processing IAS Operational intensive || Cryptography IAS; Intrusion prevention IAS; = Deep packet inspection IAS; Reconfiguration IAS; Load-balancing IAS; = Buffering & cashing IAS; Performance IAS User intensive|| User interaction IAS; Multi-user IAS; User-adaptation IAS Technology intensive|| Mobility IAS; High-speed IAS; Intensive real-time = decoding Control intensive|| Message IAS; Monitoring IAS; Power IAS; Hardware for = IAS; Software for IAS; Middleware for IAS; Threat containment IAS Complex IAS || Bioinformatics computation; Large scale ehealth systems; = Pharmaceutical/drug computation; Weather forecast computation; = Earthquake simulations; Geo-spatial simulations; Spatial programs; = Real-time manufacturing systems; Transportation systems; Avionic = systems; Economic/financial systems; Electric-power systems; =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D General Chair Fernando Boronat, Integrated Management Coastal Research Institute, Spain Program Committee Chairs Hai Jin, Huazhong University of Science and Technology - Wuhan, China Milena Radenkovic, University of Nottingham, UK DJamel H. Sadok, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Brazil Marius Slavescu, IBM Toronto Lab, Canada Chieh-Yih Wan, Intel, USA Advisory Chairs Petre Dini, Cisco Systems, Inc., USA / Concordia University, Canada Hans-Dieter Ehrich, Institut f=FCr Informationssysteme/Technische = Universit=E4t Braunschweig, Germany Chih-Cheng Hung, Southern Polytechnic State University, USA Jaime Lloret Mauri, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain Jianhua Ma, Hosei University, Japan Simon Tsang, Telcordia Technologies, Inc. - Piscataway, USA =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Fri Oct 17 15:09:29 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C67DF28C153; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:09:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27C9228C0D6; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:09:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.688, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SUBJ_ALL_CAPS=2.077] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XVMKox0KUq01; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:09:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stl-smtpout-01.boeing.com (stl-smtpout-01.boeing.com [130.76.96.56]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F83728C0E8; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (blv-av-01.boeing.com [130.247.48.231]) by stl-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id m9HM9tOO014034 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 17 Oct 2008 17:10:00 -0500 (CDT) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id m9HM9sWP006695; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:09:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from XCH-NWBH-11.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwbh-11.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.55.84]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id m9HM9s3L006686; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:09:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.54.35]) by XCH-NWBH-11.nw.nos.boeing.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:09:55 -0700 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:09:52 -0700 Message-ID: <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A1051B3DD9@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: RANGER Thread-Index: AckwpAkPmJrFi1/8QVyudNl0+fdHGAAAHjGg References: <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A10517EDDF@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com> From: "Templin, Fred L" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Oct 2008 22:09:55.0099 (UTC) FILETIME=[15D816B0:01C930A5] X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: SMEX-8.0.0.1285-5.500.1027-16222.001 X-TM-AS-Result: No--17.174100-0.000000-31 X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: Yes X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No Cc: Internet Area , manet , autoconf@ietf.org, rrg@irtf.org, DHC WG , IPv6 Operations , ipv6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Autoconf] RANGER X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Eric, Interesting question, and I'm not entirely sure how to answer it. But, if it helps, I was just in the process of adding the following text to Section 3.1 when your message came in: "It is important to note that dual-stack systems such as 'V', 'W' and 'Z' may be simple IPv6/IPv4 hosts, or they may be BRs that attach arbitrarily-complex IPv6-only edge networks. Such IPv6-only edge networks could be as simple as a home network behind a residential gateway, or as complex as a major corporate/academic campus, a large service provider network, etc." Comments are welcome, Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com >-----Original Message----- >From: EricLKlein@softhome.net [mailto:EricLKlein@softhome.net] >Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 3:02 PM >To: Templin, Fred L >Cc: Internet Area; rrg@irtf.org; IPv6 Operations; >autoconf@ietf.org; manet; ipv6@ietf.org; DHC WG >Subject: Re: RANGER > >Hi Fred, > >How do you see RANGER fitting into the requirements for >carriers to supply >IP support (v4/v6) to mobile devices? Especially requirements that are >similar to the enterprise ones that you describe? > >Eric > >Templin, Fred L writes: > >> This message is to introduce a new Internet-Draft titled: >> >> "Routing and Addressing in Next-Generation EnteRprises (RANGER)" >> >> RANGER is an architectural framework that uses well known >> (and in some cases widely-deployed) functional elements. >> RANGER is not a technical specification in itself, however >> it provides applicability analysis for the combination of >> existing and emerging technical specifications. In particular, >> it outlines an "enterprise-within-enterprise" framework that >> addresses issues such as routing scaling, IPv6/IPv4 coexistence, >> link MTU diversity, mobile ad-hoc networking, autoconfiguration, >> etc. >> >> The RANGER enterprise network model supports cooperative >> operations between diverse organizations that may have >> competing interests. The model can therefore be applied >> to the global Internet itself. >> >> In order to reduce fragmentation, please post any follow-up >> comments or questions to the int-area and rrg lists only. >> >> Fred Templin >> fred.l.templin@boeing.com >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] >> Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 11:45 AM >> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >> Subject: I-D Action:draft-templin-ranger-00.txt >> >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >> directories. >> >> Title : Routing and Addressing in Next-Generation >> EnteRprises (RANGER) >> Author(s) : F. Templin >> Filename : draft-templin-ranger-00.txt >> Pages : 17 >> Date : 2008-10-14 >> >> Enterprise networks will require support for both Internet protocol >> versions (IPv4 and IPv6) for an indeterminant period; perhaps even >> indefinitely. This is particularly true for existing enterprise >> networks that must introduce IPv6 without disruption of IPv4 >> services, but the same principles apply also to clean-slate >> deployments in new enterprises. Next-generation enterprises >> therefore require an architected solution for coordination of their >> internal routing and addressing plans for both IPv6 and IPv4. The >> RANGER architecture addresses these requirements. >> >> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-templin-ranger-00.txt >> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader >> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the >> Internet-Draft. >> > > _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Mon Oct 20 06:10:39 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D11103A6A2D; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:10:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF4C23A681A; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:10:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.995 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.995 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.696, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HeUlabFejUhD; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:10:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.smart-biggar.ca (smtp.smart-biggar.ca [209.5.109.230]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB9B23A68DA; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:10:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailav2.smart-biggar.ca ([207.35.236.220]) by smtp.smart-biggar.ca with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:11:40 -0400 Received: from (unknown [207.35.236.212]) by mailav2.smart-biggar.ca with smtp id 1dd8_a20494c6_9ea8_11dd_829c_0015c5fa1da5; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:11:39 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by gfi.smart-biggar.prv with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:11:40 -0400 Received: from mailav1.smart-biggar.ca ([207.35.236.219]) by gfi.smart-biggar.prv with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sat, 18 Oct 2008 11:48:26 -0400 Received: from (unknown [207.35.236.211]) by mailav1.smart-biggar.ca with smtp id 050c_33ed0266_9d2c_11dd_a5d5_0015c5fa10e8; Sat, 18 Oct 2008 11:48:26 -0400 Received: from grid.lrg.ufsc.br ([150.162.63.19]) by smtp.smart-biggar.ca with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sat, 18 Oct 2008 11:48:25 -0400 Received: from grid.lrg.ufsc.br (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grid.lrg.ufsc.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAED750DAC; Sat, 18 Oct 2008 10:25:10 -0300 (BRT) X-Original-To: mycolleagues@grid.lrg.ufsc.br Delivered-To: mycolleagues@grid.lrg.ufsc.br Received: from smtpsal.upv.es (marfik.cc.upv.es [158.42.249.14]) by grid.lrg.ufsc.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id 006C0882EB; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 05:45:07 -0300 (BRT) Received: from pop.upv.es (deneb.cc.upv.es [158.42.3.51]) by smtpsal.upv.es (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m9G8cNdw017271; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:38:23 +0200 Received: from smtp.upv.es (celaeno.cc.upv.es [158.42.249.55]) by pop.upv.es (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id m9G8cNG20425; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:38:23 +0200 (METDST) Received: from [158.42.146.208] (fboronat3.gnd.upv.es [158.42.146.208]) by smtp.upv.es (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m9G8cMDP004121; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:38:22 +0200 Message-ID: <48F6FD7E.7010800@dcom.upv.es> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:38:22 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fernando_Boronat_Segu=ED?= Organization: Universidad =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Polit=E9cnica_de_Valencia?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sam@ietf.org, tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu, autoconf@ietf.org, COMMSOFT@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG, tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu, sigmm@pi4.informatik.uni-mannheim.de, mycolleagues@grid.lrg.ufsc.br, mycolleagues-bounces@grid.lrg.ufsc.br X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 10:24:47 -0300 X-BeenThere: mycolleagues@grid.lrg.ufsc.br X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Oct 2008 15:48:26.0359 (UTC) FILETIME=[F5814870:01C93138] Subject: [Autoconf] [Mycolleagues] 2nd CfP: INTENSIVE 2009 | April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org Reply-To: fboronat@dcom.upv.es List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org I apologize if you receive several copies of this mail. Please consider to contribute to and/or forward to the appropriate = groups the following opportunity to submit and publish original = scientific results. Thank you Very Much =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D INTENSIVE 2009 | Call for Papers= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 2nd CALL FOR PAPERS, TUTORIALS, PANELS INTENSIVE 2009, The First International Conference on Intensive = Applications and Services April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain General page: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/INTENSIVE09.html Call for Papers: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/CfPINTENSIVE09.html Submission deadline: November 1, 2008 Submissions will be peer-reviewed, published by IEEE CPS, posted in IEEE = Digital Library, and indexed with the major indexes. Extended versions of selected papers will be published in IARIA = Journals: http://www.iariajournals.org Please note the Poster Forum special submission with on progress and = challenging ideas. INTENSIVE 2009 Special Areas (details in the CfP on site): Basics on IAS (Intensive Applications and Services) || Fundamentals on = IAS; Heuristics for relaxing IAS; Optimization on IAS; Coordinated = checkpointing and rollback in IAS; Approximation approach in IAS; = Suboptimal solutions in IAS; Distribution IAS; Pervasive parallelism IAS Communications intensive || Transaction IAS; Bandwidth IAS; Traffic IAS; = Broadcast and multicast IAS; Propagation IAS; Stream media intensive Process intensive || Resource IAS; Computation IAS; Memory IAS; Data = acquisition IAS; Data compression IAS; Replication intensive IAS; = Storage IAS; Access IAS; Image processing IAS Operational intensive || Cryptography IAS; Intrusion prevention IAS; = Deep packet inspection IAS; Reconfiguration IAS; Load-balancing IAS; = Buffering & cashing IAS; Performance IAS User intensive|| User interaction IAS; Multi-user IAS; User-adaptation IAS Technology intensive|| Mobility IAS; High-speed IAS; Intensive real-time = decoding Control intensive|| Message IAS; Monitoring IAS; Power IAS; Hardware for = IAS; Software for IAS; Middleware for IAS; Threat containment IAS Complex IAS || Bioinformatics computation; Large scale ehealth systems; = Pharmaceutical/drug computation; Weather forecast computation; = Earthquake simulations; Geo-spatial simulations; Spatial programs; = Real-time manufacturing systems; Transportation systems; Avionic = systems; Economic/financial systems; Electric-power systems; =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D General Chair Fernando Boronat, Integrated Management Coastal Research Institute, Spain Program Committee Chairs Hai Jin, Huazhong University of Science and Technology - Wuhan, China Milena Radenkovic, University of Nottingham, UK DJamel H. Sadok, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Brazil Marius Slavescu, IBM Toronto Lab, Canada Chieh-Yih Wan, Intel, USA Advisory Chairs Petre Dini, Cisco Systems, Inc., USA / Concordia University, Canada Hans-Dieter Ehrich, Institut f=FCr Informationssysteme/Technische = Universit=E4t Braunschweig, Germany Chih-Cheng Hung, Southern Polytechnic State University, USA Jaime Lloret Mauri, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain Jianhua Ma, Hosei University, Japan Simon Tsang, Telcordia Technologies, Inc. - Piscataway, USA =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D _______________________________________________ Mycolleagues mailing list Mycolleagues@grid.lrg.ufsc.br http://grid.lrg.ufsc.br/mailman/listinfo/mycolleagues _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Mon Oct 20 06:29:17 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A0FD3A69E6; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:29:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA0913A69E2 for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:29:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id euSC7-Mjye9p for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:29:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gx0-f16.google.com (mail-gx0-f16.google.com [209.85.217.16]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A01ED3A699D for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:29:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by gxk9 with SMTP id 9so3588981gxk.13 for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:30:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition; bh=nNK+yMGbOByLabPSZq9kG+LK4B7Hv+EKZbqJ1UgSD58=; b=otXTqBq0KXqBfM04eU6VLCV7tkUusmQPXAsFObjck8rMCU3il9kqXd9fkuOUz6TxC/ DQArMGPCokAfngRYdk1w0oUyppivszUwUpDQ6TJEX+Sj236v0YImLQSrp3rULjWpBFGa IY7QC3GD4ezr78Pte0ZmncQ353j+Fl4vw3tuY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=eqXLgSh4CgJyk2Mjp2myHPWSwAiDLxxH1u1EVAPR19g0DgnYQl4gPnpO9woxSjwVz8 vY2ERl7VMd6qRldLw89SsRLmeJlQkaXHR3Km9HUAVBNqevJk43XioizMErbLr2lWLnxz ajeIdiSnVOcay9QM7zgdovyCQ/r9/R5iSTXkc= Received: by 10.142.171.9 with SMTP id t9mr3043883wfe.341.1224509425409; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:30:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.88.7 with HTTP; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:30:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 19:00:25 +0530 From: Shubhranshu To: "Jari Arkko" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, autoconf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Input to the IESG on draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Below are some of my observations, followed by my input to the IESG: The Autoconf wg charter says "The main purpose of the AUTOCONF WG is to standardize mechanisms to be used by ad hoc nodes for configuring unique local and/or globally routable IPv6 addresses." One of the goals of the WG is (taken from the charter) "Develop an IPv6 address autoconfiguration mechanism to be used by ad hoc nodes for configuring unique local addresses as well as, in cases where Internet connectivity exists, globally routable unique addresses." The document, draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp says (introduction section) "The different types of interfaces are defined, and the autoconfiguration mechanisms used for each type are specified. " Section 4 then specifies autoconfiguration of EIR, EBR, EBG. Currently the group is working on the architecture document and IMO, at this point publishing draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp, which makes specific architectural assumptions would likely influence and undermine the WG effort. Considering this and noting that the draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp overlaps with the Autoconf work, my input to the IESG is to delay the publication of draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp for, say six months. During this time I'd strongly encourage authors of draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp and other members of the group to contribute to the wg MANET architecture document. - Shubhranshu ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jari Arkko" To: Cc: "Ross Callon" Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 5:09 PM Subject: [Autoconf] Input to the IESG on draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp > Dear all, > > There are several ways to publish RFCs. One method is to take the > document through a working group and the IETF process, and publish it as > an RFC when last call and IESG review have been completed. > > Another method is called the Independent Submission method, and it > allows people to submit documents to the RFC Editor directly, without > any IETF review. Given the lack of review at the IETF, these are not > standards of any sort. However, they can still be valuable contributions > and they are often used, for instance, to document vendor specific > protocols or someone's thoughts on some topic. These documents do get > some review from the IESG, however, to ensure, for instance, that they > do not make IANA allocations that would require taking the document > through the IETF process. Where there is some overlap with work in an > IETF WG, the IESG has a variety of steps that it can recommend to the > RFC editor, such as delaying publication so that the WG can first > complete its work, and/or adding an IESG note to clarify the status of > the document. > > Fred Templin has submitted a document through the Independent > Submissions process on his views about on MANET architecture, > autoconfiguration, and use of DHCP. The IESG needs to make a decision on > what to do about this document. Fred's document does not define a > protocol or allocate any new IANA values, so from that perspective there > is no reason for the IESG to recommend that it be delayed or not > published. However, it does have overlap with the chartered work of > AUTOCONF, namely with the architecture document. In these cases, the > IESG can use its judgment to determine whether publishing the work will > be harmful to the WGs progress, or to the industry. We'd like to collect > input from the WG on this matter. If there are no objections we are > inclined to recommend that the RFC Editor publish Fred's document. > > Please respond by Tuesday, Oct 21st. Note that we are not asking for > technical feedback on Fred's document, or whether you believe its > contents are correct or incorrect. If you have that type of input, > please send it to Fred directly. > > Finally, and more importantly we would also like the AUTOCONF WG to > deliver its own architecture document as soon as possible. We know that > Thomas and others are working on a new version, but the ADs want to > stress that progress on this document is crucial for the continued > existence of the WG. When the new version appears, we need substantial > help from the WG to review and progress it. > > Jari Arkko and Ross Callon > _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Mon Oct 20 06:36:24 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D99AC3A699A; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:36:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 468FC3A6955 for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:36:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.604 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.604 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, RELAY_IS_203=0.994, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 821puUcsyXTM for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:36:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout5.samsung.com (mailout5.samsung.com [203.254.224.35]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE18E3A699A for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:36:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from epmmp2 (mailout5.samsung.com [203.254.224.35]) by mailout5.samsung.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 Patch 2 (built Jul 14 2004)) with ESMTP id <0K910036THUDSV@mailout5.samsung.com> for autoconf@ietf.org; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 22:37:25 +0900 (KST) Received: from Shubhranshu ([107.108.209.68]) by mmp2.samsung.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 Patch 2 (built Jul 14 2004)) with ESMTPA id <0K91003JXHUAS3@mmp2.samsung.com> for autoconf@ietf.org; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 22:37:25 +0900 (KST) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 19:10:14 +0530 From: Shubhranshu To: fboronat@dcom.upv.es Message-id: <011401c932b9$63250980$44d16c6b@sisodomain.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <48F6FD7E.7010800@dcom.upv.es> Cc: autoconf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Autoconf] [Mycolleagues] 2nd CfP: INTENSIVE 2009 | April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed" Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Hello Fernando Boronat Segu=ED, Below is third mail sent to the Autoconf wg mailing list for the same Call = for paper. The Autoconf list has been set-up for = technical and other related discussions within the scope of the WG charter = and as such any Call for Paper e-mail to the mailing list = is normally strongly discouraged. Please consider not to re-send/send such = mail to the mailing list. Thanks, - Shubhranshu ----- Original Message ----- = From: "Fernando Boronat Segu=ED" To: ; ; ; ; ; = ; ; Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 2:08 PM Subject: [Autoconf] [Mycolleagues] 2nd CfP: INTENSIVE 2009 | April 21-25,20= 09 - Valencia, Spain I apologize if you receive several copies of this mail. Please consider to contribute to and/or forward to the appropriate groups the following opportunity to submit and publish original scientific results. Thank you Very Much =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D INTENSIVE 2009 | Call for Papers= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 2nd CALL FOR PAPERS, TUTORIALS, PANELS INTENSIVE 2009, The First International Conference on Intensive Applications and Services April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain General page: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/INTENSIVE09.html Call for Papers: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/CfPINTENSIVE09.html Submission deadline: November 1, 2008 Submissions will be peer-reviewed, published by IEEE CPS, posted in IEEE Digital Library, and indexed with the major indexes. Extended versions of selected papers will be published in IARIA Journals: http://www.iariajournals.org Please note the Poster Forum special submission with on progress and challenging ideas. INTENSIVE 2009 Special Areas (details in the CfP on site): Basics on IAS (Intensive Applications and Services) || Fundamentals on IAS; Heuristics for relaxing IAS; Optimization on IAS; Coordinated checkpointing and rollback in IAS; Approximation approach in IAS; Suboptimal solutions in IAS; Distribution IAS; Pervasive parallelism IAS Communications intensive || Transaction IAS; Bandwidth IAS; Traffic IAS; Broadcast and multicast IAS; Propagation IAS; Stream media intensive Process intensive || Resource IAS; Computation IAS; Memory IAS; Data acquisition IAS; Data compression IAS; Replication intensive IAS; Storage IAS; Access IAS; Image processing IAS Operational intensive || Cryptography IAS; Intrusion prevention IAS; Deep packet inspection IAS; Reconfiguration IAS; Load-balancing IAS; Buffering & cashing IAS; Performance IAS User intensive|| User interaction IAS; Multi-user IAS; User-adaptation IAS Technology intensive|| Mobility IAS; High-speed IAS; Intensive real-time decoding Control intensive|| Message IAS; Monitoring IAS; Power IAS; Hardware for IAS; Software for IAS; Middleware for IAS; Threat containment IAS Complex IAS || Bioinformatics computation; Large scale ehealth systems; Pharmaceutical/drug computation; Weather forecast computation; Earthquake simulations; Geo-spatial simulations; Spatial programs; Real-time manufacturing systems; Transportation systems; Avionic systems; Economic/financial systems; Electric-power systems; =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D General Chair Fernando Boronat, Integrated Management Coastal Research Institute, Spain Program Committee Chairs Hai Jin, Huazhong University of Science and Technology - Wuhan, China Milena Radenkovic, University of Nottingham, UK DJamel H. Sadok, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Brazil Marius Slavescu, IBM Toronto Lab, Canada Chieh-Yih Wan, Intel, USA Advisory Chairs Petre Dini, Cisco Systems, Inc., USA / Concordia University, Canada Hans-Dieter Ehrich, Institut f=FCr Informationssysteme/Technische Universit=E4t Braunschweig, Germany Chih-Cheng Hung, Southern Polytechnic State University, USA Jaime Lloret Mauri, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain Jianhua Ma, Hosei University, Japan Simon Tsang, Telcordia Technologies, Inc. - Piscataway, USA =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D _______________________________________________ Mycolleagues mailing list Mycolleagues@grid.lrg.ufsc.br http://grid.lrg.ufsc.br/mailman/listinfo/mycolleagues _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf = _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Mon Oct 20 06:56:31 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E74D3A69EF; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:56:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 380F63A69BC for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:56:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.106 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.493, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4nqxOboH5wtC for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:56:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e1.ny.us.ibm.com (e1.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.141]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F3483A67EE for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:56:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (d01relay02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.234]) by e1.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m9KDvckq001091 for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:57:38 -0400 Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (d01av02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.216]) by d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.1) with ESMTP id m9KDvc6n097032 for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:57:38 -0400 Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av02.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m9KDvaNb008866 for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:57:36 -0400 Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (sig-9-65-194-233.mts.ibm.com [9.65.194.233]) by d01av02.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m9KDvZ83008811 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:57:36 -0400 Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.2/8.12.5) with ESMTP id m9KDva2K010877; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:57:36 -0400 Message-Id: <200810201357.m9KDva2K010877@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> To: Shubhranshu In-reply-to: References: Comments: In-reply-to Shubhranshu message dated "Mon, 20 Oct 2008 19:00:25 +0530." Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:57:36 -0400 From: Thomas Narten Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, autoconf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Input to the IESG on draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Shubhranshu writes: > Currently the group is working on the architecture document and IMO, > at this point publishing draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp, which makes > specific architectural assumptions would likely influence and > undermine the WG effort. Please explain how or why this is so. Especially "undermine". IMO, having the topic of an ID overlap with the work (or potential work) in a chartered WG is not (by itself) sufficient justification to block or delay publication. The IETF has a long history of publishing work that is related to a WG effort, so long as doing so doesn't cause any obvious or significant harm. I very much do think it is valid to block publication of a document if (say) the market is going to be confused about the RFC and somehow implement it rather than waiting for the IETF effort -- and in a way that significantly harms interoperability. For the classic example of where this was done, publication of the Photuris documents was blocked until the original IPsec documents set was finished. But there was a real concern about confusion and fragmentation of a very important market (i.e., security), and the Photuris documents had been discussed (and rejected) by the WG. In the case of autoconf, my take is: There is no vendor or industry segment desperately waiting for the output of this group in order to ship product. Thus, having a document appear is not likely to "confuse the market" and cause anyone to implement the other effort rather than wait for this WG to finish. (If there is a vendor or industry segement that is waiting for a document, please educate me... ) Also, I suspect (but don't know for sure) that the author has simply given up on waiting for the WG to actually do anything. Certainly, such a view would be justified. > Considering this and noting that the draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp > overlaps with the Autoconf work, my input to the IESG is to delay the > publication of draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp for, say six months. During > this time I'd strongly encourage authors of > draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp and other members of the group to > contribute to the wg MANET architecture document. Um, to speak frankly/bluntly, this WG has been dysfunctional for the last year. (Just look at what it has actually done and how much progress it has made.) Suggesting that the authors need to participate in the WG effort more is a Red Herring. Exactly what should the authors (or anyone else for that matter?) be doing that they haven't been? In summary, for the IESG (or this WG) to recommend blocking a document, it needs to be clear about why such a step is appropriate. There needs to be some clear potential harm resulting from publication. Consider draft-housley-iesg-rfc3932bis-04.txt: Section 3 lists the conditions under which publication can be blocked. The two categories that seem relevant to the present discussion are: The IESG review of these Independent Stream and IRTF Stream documents reach one of the following five types of conclusions. 2. The IESG finds that this work is related to IETF work done in WG , but this relationship does not prevent publishing. 3. The IESG finds that publication is harmful to the IETF work done in WG and recommends not publishing the document at this time. For us, the question is which of case 2 or 3 applies. For 3), we need to articulate the "harm". IMO, it is not sufficient to just say "the work is related" (and indeed, if that were sufficient, there would be no need for 2). Section 4 gives some examples where publication delay or denial may be appropriate. Do any of the examples cited there apply to this case? Thomas _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Tue Oct 21 05:01:58 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D52C3A6A0D; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:01:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 082DB3A6B4A for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:01:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BwLbfyiKr6+l for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:01:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gx0-f16.google.com (mail-gx0-f16.google.com [209.85.217.16]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FE1F3A6A0D for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:01:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by gxk9 with SMTP id 9so5277673gxk.13 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:02:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition; bh=DPcEBihB/p9rKygfkFZOhPiGGTxL5iTCXmOefQlaTwE=; b=JbEjdRAbpKrtnewz8Pe5ZAUJ08AMhqybW2uH1NFClf0vcWUzouUQgJVpPHR+bveYem oK0v2za5K3vg80sbu1AcmaSYjt8h1kh8wu5oNv+dv9s6rxoiyyV3BuskiJ+w0gcOtUoX 0ZCKH8rqlbnXpqMSjnmKxU/W4sroQ4X7Kkgmk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=XjSmMi8yPEKQ1T4FUe9i+VJ2xxMiLzvHU37pS+UM8mTZyN5BASmcDRuuRM0CeXDWka a8Ph9amo9RMBnuZl1Na6t0Tq4svsP96zb++wVFWvI/R4Od/ceVP3ZFxdg6CvA65hqKUb JNjZuFYdfIKAYVBEQcL1qfm1ncae3CMXXWeEU= Received: by 10.143.19.16 with SMTP id w16mr3688184wfi.223.1224590570696; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:02:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.88.7 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:02:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:32:50 +0530 From: Shubhranshu To: "Thomas Narten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, autoconf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Input to the IESG on draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Hello Thomas, Thanks for your detail comments. My input is not to permanently block the document but to postpone for a while. Apart from overlap of work, the reasoning was, using the language of 3932bis, "Publication of the document will give the publishing party an RFC number before the WG is finished. It seems better to have the WG product published first, and have the non-adopted document published later". I agree, AFAIK, there is no vendor desperately waiting for the output of this group to ship product however I worry that having an already published RFC with certain architectural assumptions and solutions might confuse, influence and help further lose interest/effort in design and agreement of wg's architecture/solutions. I agree, the reason for my input to delay the publication of this document is not as strong as in the case of Photuris that you mentioned but then I do not find any strong reason supporting its immediate publication. To answer your other question, there are different ways to contribute at this point. One could directly provide inputs to the members involved in the ongoing effort, propose text on the architectural issues raised and help discussion towards conclusion and accelerate the work. - Shubhranshu ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas Narten" To: "Shubhranshu" Cc: ; Sent: Monday, October 20, 2008 7:27 PM Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Input to the IESG on draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp > Shubhranshu writes: > >> Currently the group is working on the architecture document and IMO, >> at this point publishing draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp, which makes >> specific architectural assumptions would likely influence and >> undermine the WG effort. > > Please explain how or why this is so. Especially "undermine". > > IMO, having the topic of an ID overlap with the work (or potential > work) in a chartered WG is not (by itself) sufficient justification to > block or delay publication. The IETF has a long history of publishing > work that is related to a WG effort, so long as doing so doesn't cause > any obvious or significant harm. > > I very much do think it is valid to block publication of a document if > (say) the market is going to be confused about the RFC and somehow > implement it rather than waiting for the IETF effort -- and in a way > that significantly harms interoperability. For the classic example of > where this was done, publication of the Photuris documents was blocked > until the original IPsec documents set was finished. But there was a > real concern about confusion and fragmentation of a very important > market (i.e., security), and the Photuris documents had been discussed > (and rejected) by the WG. > > In the case of autoconf, my take is: > > There is no vendor or industry segment desperately waiting for the > output of this group in order to ship product. Thus, having a document > appear is not likely to "confuse the market" and cause anyone to > implement the other effort rather than wait for this WG to finish. > > (If there is a vendor or industry segement that is waiting for a > document, please educate me... ) > > Also, I suspect (but don't know for sure) that the author has simply > given up on waiting for the WG to actually do anything. Certainly, > such a view would be justified. > >> Considering this and noting that the draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp >> overlaps with the Autoconf work, my input to the IESG is to delay the >> publication of draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp for, say six months. During >> this time I'd strongly encourage authors of >> draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp and other members of the group to >> contribute to the wg MANET architecture document. > > Um, to speak frankly/bluntly, this WG has been dysfunctional for the > last year. (Just look at what it has actually done and how much > progress it has made.) Suggesting that the authors need to participate > in the WG effort more is a Red Herring. Exactly what should the > authors (or anyone else for that matter?) be doing that they haven't > been? > > In summary, for the IESG (or this WG) to recommend blocking a > document, it needs to be clear about why such a step is > appropriate. There needs to be some clear potential harm resulting > from publication. > > Consider draft-housley-iesg-rfc3932bis-04.txt: > > Section 3 lists the conditions under which publication can be > blocked. The two categories that seem relevant to the present > discussion are: > > The IESG review of these Independent Stream and IRTF Stream documents > reach one of the following five types of conclusions. > > 2. The IESG finds that this work is related to IETF work done in WG > , but this relationship does not prevent publishing. > > 3. The IESG finds that publication is harmful to the IETF work done > in WG and recommends not publishing the document at this time. > > For us, the question is which of case 2 or 3 applies. For 3), we > need to articulate the "harm". IMO, it is not sufficient to just say > "the work is related" (and indeed, if that were sufficient, there > would be no need for 2). > > Section 4 gives some examples where publication delay or denial may be > appropriate. Do any of the examples cited there apply to this case? > > Thomas _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Tue Oct 21 05:29:02 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA9CC3A6A39; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:29:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E86C128C0D6 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:29:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.155 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.155 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.444, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dw2g6r8XGjFa for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:29:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com (e31.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB1FD3A6B67 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:29:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.227]) by e31.co.us.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m9LCThDi023514 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 06:29:43 -0600 Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (d03av04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.170]) by d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.1) with ESMTP id m9LCUEt2144664 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 06:30:14 -0600 Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m9LCUDij017410 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 06:30:14 -0600 Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (sig-9-65-215-175.mts.ibm.com [9.65.215.175]) by d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m9LCU9al017212 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 06:30:12 -0600 Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.2/8.12.5) with ESMTP id m9LCU8DX026181; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 08:30:08 -0400 Message-Id: <200810211230.m9LCU8DX026181@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> To: Shubhranshu In-reply-to: References: Comments: In-reply-to Shubhranshu message dated "Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:32:50 +0530." Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 08:30:08 -0400 From: Thomas Narten Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, autoconf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Input to the IESG on draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Shubhranshu writes: > Hello Thomas, > Thanks for your detail comments. My input is not to permanently > block the document but to postpone for a while. Apart from overlap > of work, the reasoning was, using the language of 3932bis, > "Publication of the document will give the publishing party an RFC > number before the WG is finished. It seems better to have the WG > product published first, and have the non-adopted document published > later". This sounds like a generic argument for NEVER allowing related work to be published if there is an ongoing chartered WG. But from what I can tell, the IETF has strongly disagreed with this as a starting point (there have been long discussions about this on the ietf list, leading to RFC 3932 and its successor draft-housley-iesg-rfc3932bis-04.txt). The default starting point should be to allow publication, unless there is a good reason not to. So, what specific harm or downside is there to publishing a document now? > I agree, AFAIK, there is no vendor desperately waiting for the > output of this group to ship product however I worry that having an > already published RFC with certain architectural assumptions and > solutions might confuse, influence and help further lose > interest/effort in design and agreement of wg's > architecture/solutions. >From what I can tell (by the lack of progress in this WG over the last 3 years), nobody really needs this work. If they did, they would be screaming within the WG to get its act together and make progress. This alone, suggests to me that nobody is going to be silly enough to look at an RFC and be "confused" by it. Also, all RFC editor submissions that get published include the standard disclaimer making clear that the work is not the output of an IETF WG. And, they frequently (and could in this case) point people to the autoconf WG as a place where related work is being done. > I agree, the reason for my input to delay the publication of this > document is not as strong as in the case of Photuris that you > mentioned but then I do not find any strong reason supporting its > immediate publication. Again, the default starting point is "allow publication unless doing so causes harm" not "you need to convince me there is a good reason to publish this document". > To answer your other question, there are different ways to contribute > at this point. One could directly provide inputs to the members > involved in the ongoing effort, propose text on the architectural > issues raised and help discussion towards conclusion and accelerate > the work. Again, these are all high-level, generic suggestions on what to do. They do not seem to take into account that there has been no substantive discussion on anything on this mailing list in months, it didn't meeting in Dubin, and I don't recall the chairs having made any call to the WG for help on resolving any outstanding issues. Sorry to be blunt, but I'm very frustrated/disappointed by the lack of progress of this WG, and given that lack of progress, I think the WG has absolutely no legitimacy in trying to block publication of a document just because it "overlaps" with the subject matter of the WG. Again, I'm open to delaying publication, but I have yet to hear a compelling argument there is a real harm/drawback to doing so. Thomas _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Tue Oct 21 14:09:46 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E76263A6BA1; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:09:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 865DF3A6B9C for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:09:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GZ4sV5k9ltuT for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:09:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hpsmtp-eml14.kpnxchange.com (hpsmtp-eml14.kpnxchange.com [213.75.38.114]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED4663A68FC for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:09:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cpsmtpi-eml05.kpnxchange.com ([213.75.38.135]) by hpsmtp-eml14.kpnxchange.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 23:10:42 +0200 Received: from M90Teco ([86.83.9.22]) by cpsmtpi-eml05.kpnxchange.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 23:10:42 +0200 From: "Teco Boot" To: "'Thomas Narten'" References: <200810211230.m9LCU8DX026181@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <200810211230.m9LCU8DX026181@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 23:10:37 +0200 Message-ID: <000601c933c1$773a1650$65ae42f0$@nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AckzeMm13mHffDHFQmOdQlZlLqPTjgARQWlA Content-Language: nl X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Oct 2008 21:10:42.0238 (UTC) FILETIME=[79D385E0:01C933C1] Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, autoconf@ietf.org, 'Shubhranshu' Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Input to the IESG on draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Hi Thomas, > From what I can tell (by the lack of progress in this WG over the last > 3 years), nobody really needs this work. If they did, they would be > screaming within the WG to get its act together and make > progress. This alone, suggests to me that nobody is going to be silly > enough to look at an RFC and be "confused" by it. SCREAM LOUDLY. I think nobody is satisfied with progress of Autoconf. Please explain "nobody really needs this work". IMHO the reason for slow progress / no progress at all is a road block. We (members of IETF interested in Autoconf) are waiting on Autoconf chairs, Manet_Arch authors and IESG end a debate that is far out of our sight. > They do not seem to take into account that there has been no > substantive discussion on anything on this mailing list in months, it > didn't meeting in Dubin, and I don't recall the chairs having made any > call to the WG for help on resolving any outstanding issues. We had an informal meeting in Dublin, discussed the Manet_Arch debate topic and some of us have action points. I offered help (http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/autoconf/current/msg01084.html), but I did not receive any response. I think we need fresh blood in Autoconf for getting work done. Regards, Teco _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 22 05:32:28 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58DB03A6A19; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 05:32:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B2FC3A6A03 for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 05:32:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.229 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.229 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.370, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5kp6jESJlIFX for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 05:32:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e33.co.us.ibm.com (e33.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.151]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 861BC3A692F for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 05:32:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.106]) by e33.co.us.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m9MCWNXm005725 for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 06:32:23 -0600 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168]) by d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.1) with ESMTP id m9MCWQkp087704 for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 06:32:30 -0600 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m9MCVrZd008059 for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 06:31:54 -0600 Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (sig-9-48-37-204.mts.ibm.com [9.48.37.204]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m9MCVokv007823 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 22 Oct 2008 06:31:51 -0600 Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.2/8.12.5) with ESMTP id m9MCWH9C005583; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 08:32:18 -0400 Message-Id: <200810221232.m9MCWH9C005583@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> To: "Teco Boot" In-reply-to: <000601c933c1$773a1650$65ae42f0$@nl> References: <200810211230.m9LCU8DX026181@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <000601c933c1$773a1650$65ae42f0$@nl> Comments: In-reply-to "Teco Boot" message dated "Tue, 21 Oct 2008 23:10:37 +0200." Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 08:32:17 -0400 From: Thomas Narten Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, autoconf@ietf.org, 'Shubhranshu' Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Input to the IESG on draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Hi Teco. > > From what I can tell (by the lack of progress in this WG over the last > > 3 years), nobody really needs this work. If they did, they would be > > screaming within the WG to get its act together and make > > progress. This alone, suggests to me that nobody is going to be silly > > enough to look at an RFC and be "confused" by it. > SCREAM LOUDLY. Indeed! But where are the screams? > I think nobody is satisfied with progress of Autoconf. To be clear, I didn't mean to imply this. > Please explain "nobody really needs this work". In my experience, when something is really needed by the market, there are either multiple vendors with proprietary implementations already and/or there are vendors that want to implement something (because customers want it), but they would rather implement a proper standard than pick one of the proprietary implementations. In such cases, people are usually screaming rather loudly if the WG is being too slow and or not delivering. I simply do not sense that happening with this WG. (Again, if I am wrong, please enlighten me.) Thomas _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 22 06:53:03 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98DD628C135; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 06:53:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A798428C135 for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 06:53:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.323 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.323 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.277, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1osf6PIlzEuG for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 06:53:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hpsmtp-eml11.kpnxchange.com (hpsmtp-eml11.KPNXCHANGE.COM [213.75.38.111]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4680228C133 for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 06:53:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hpsmtp-eml05.kpnxchange.com ([213.75.38.105]) by hpsmtp-eml11.kpnxchange.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:54:07 +0200 Received: from M90Teco ([86.83.9.22]) by hpsmtp-eml05.kpnxchange.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:54:04 +0200 From: "Teco Boot" To: "'Thomas Narten'" References: <200810211230.m9LCU8DX026181@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <000601c933c1$773a1650$65ae42f0$@nl> <200810221232.m9MCWH9C005583@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <200810221232.m9MCWH9C005583@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:53:57 +0200 Message-ID: <005601c9344d$a26abc80$e7403580$@nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Ack0QkxWP9QgRvPSQ/y/YOtNeADAOQAAyD8g Content-Language: nl X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Oct 2008 13:54:04.0131 (UTC) FILETIME=[A4F36330:01C9344D] Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, autoconf@ietf.org, 'Shubhranshu' Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Input to the IESG on draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Hi Thomas, OK, now we are in the discussion on whether or not there is an urgent need for an Autoconf solution. My opinion on this: - Fred Templin has a track record on putting a lot of effort on this. His attempt to get an RFC out there is some evidence. Fred is not the only one worked hard on Autoconf. - Personally I am involved in designing a very large MANET (we could need a new term for a MANET larger than 10000 nodes, this is missing in Manet_Arch). I don't see solutions using "flat" MANET routing protocols supporting this scalability, so I am interested in using hierarchy and backbone infrastructures for that. Backbones can scale to almost infinity. I see IPv6 auto address configuration as a nice facility for ad hoc networks, so therefore I propose using IPv6. In short: Autoconf is important for me. - Many military organizations have plans to upgrade their tactical networks. At least one country takes this extremely serious (lucky guy I am, as I have a sponsor for my efforts!). Others are also working on it, but not that active in IETF. - There is a reason that ISP (and vendors with strong relation to them) are not that interested in MANETs. Mostly the usage of an ad hoc network is free of charge. ISPs / Wireless Network Operators cannot live from that, and they put lots of effort on providing "infrastructure mode" to anybody that can afford it. I have nothing against this, but sometimes it is not applicable. The problem here is that some customers need a hybrid mode (ad hoc and infrastructure), but providers dislike this for business reasons. I think this will change. - For those outside the military that need ad hoc networks, the organizations are mostly small and do not have the resources to design their infrastructures. Side remark: the term -ad hoc- is somewhat in contradiction with -design-. I have contacts outside the military, the problem that I see there is that the organizations are mostly de-centralized and they have just started looking at solutions for their data communication needs. Disasters in the last decade provided evidence that there is a need for ad hoc voice and data networks (they use other terms also, such as hasty formed networks). Most pilots are small in size, and the problems with addressing, routing and multi-homing does not appear yet. But when looking at what they are doing, the need for solutions like scalable MANETs and auto address configuration is evident. - Many researchers are interested in MANET. Autoconf is not that interested for them, we just have to define some tricks and we are done. Maybe we have lack of engineering experience in MANET and Autoconf WGs. Others: Please post opinions on this, focused on whether Autoconf work is important or not. Kind regards, Teco _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Fri Oct 31 02:19:08 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF1EF3A6BC8; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 02:19:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65A563A6BBF for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 02:19:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.185 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.185 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.185, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cACzss+QHyoQ for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 02:19:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpsal.upv.es (marfik.cc.upv.es [158.42.249.14]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0324128C0FF for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 02:19:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pop.upv.es (deneb.cc.upv.es [158.42.3.51]) by smtpsal.upv.es (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m9V9J3DV028766 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 10:19:03 +0100 Received: from smtp.upv.es (celaeno.cc.upv.es [158.42.249.55]) by pop.upv.es (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id m9V9J2K25177 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 10:19:02 +0100 (MET) Received: from JLLORET (mp3mix.gnd.upv.es [158.42.145.152]) by smtp.upv.es (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id m9V9J2Se026938 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 10:19:02 +0100 Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 10:19:02 +0100 Message-Id: <200810310919.m9V9J2Se026938@smtp.upv.es> From: Jaime Lloret Mauri To: autoconf@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 081021-0, 21/10/2008), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Subject: [Autoconf] Deadline extension: ICNS 2009 + 1st Workshop LMPCNAP | April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0354070696==" Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org --===============0354070696== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Note that the deadline extension for ICNS 2009 has been extended to November 10. We would like to make ICNS 2009 a primary reference event. Please consider to contribute to and/or forward to the appropriate groups the following opportunity to submit and publish original scientific results. Please note that extended versions of highly ranked papers will be invited for journals submission. Full contributions are expected by the submission deadline. =========== ICNS 2009 + 1st Workshop LMPCNAP | Call for Papers =========== CALL FOR PAPERS, TUTORIALS, PANELS - ICNS 2009, The Fifth International Conference on Networking and Services April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain General page: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/ICNS09.html Call for Papers: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/CfPICNS09.html - The first International Workshop on Learning Methodologies and Platforms used in the Cisco Networking Academy Program (CNAP), LMPCNAP 2009 will be held during ICNS 2009 in April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain General page: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/LMPCNAP.html Important deadlines: Submission (full paper) November 10, 2008 Authors notification December 5, 2008 Registration December 20, 2008 Camera ready December 25, 2008 Submissions will be peer-reviewed, published by IEEE CS Press, posted in IEEE Digital Library, and indexed with the major indexes. Extended versions of selected papers will be published in IARIA Journals: http://www.iariajournals.org Please note the Poster Forum special submission with on progress and challenging ideas. ICNS 2009 Area Tracks are the following (details in the CfP on site): ENCOT: Emerging Network Communications and Technologies COMAN: Network Control and Management SERVI: Multi-technology service deployment and assurance NGNUS: Next Generation Networks and Ubiquitous Services MPQSI: Multi Provider QoS/SLA Internetworking GRIDNS: Grid Networks and Services EDNA: Emergency Services and Disaster Recovery of Networks and Applications IPv6DFI: Deploying the Future Infrastructure IPDy: Internet Packet Dynamics GOBS: GRID over Optical Burst Switching Networks ================================= - ICNS General Chair Jaime Lloret Mauri, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain - ICNS 2009 Industry Chairs Kevin Y Ung, Boeing, USA Leo Lehmann, OFCOM, Switzerland Francisco Javier Sánchez, Administrador de Infraestructuras Ferroviarias (ADIF), Spain - ICNS 2009 Technical Program Committee Chair Giancarlo Fortino, Università della Calabria, Italy Salvador Sales, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain Feng Xia, Queensland University of Technology, Australia / Zhejiang University, China - ICNS Advisory Chairs Wojciech Burakowski, Warsaw University of Technology, Poland Vicente Casares, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain Petre Dini, Cisco Systems, Inc., USA / Concordia University, Canada Xiaohua Jia, City University of Hong Kong - Kowloon, Hong Kong Manuel Sierra-Pérez, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Spain - LMPCNAP 2009 General Chair Rafael Tomas, Mediterranean Cisco Academy Training Center (CATC), Spain - LMPCNAP 2009 Technical Program Commitee chair Prof. Tomeu Serra, Universitat de les Illes Balears, Spain ================================ --===============0354070696== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf --===============0354070696==-- From autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Fri Oct 31 08:07:31 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8736C3A6C0C; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 08:07:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAB1B3A6C10 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 08:07:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IMvu1R41YrdS for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 08:07:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpsal.upv.es (marfik.cc.upv.es [158.42.249.14]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 523D93A6B97 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 08:07:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pop.upv.es (deneb.cc.upv.es [158.42.3.51]) by smtpsal.upv.es (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m9VF5uMn023438 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:05:56 +0100 Received: from smtp.upv.es (celaeno.cc.upv.es [158.42.249.55]) by pop.upv.es (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id m9VF5tD15137 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:05:55 +0100 (MET) Received: from JLLORET (vpn245-51.vpns.upv.es [158.42.245.51]) by smtp.upv.es (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id m9VF5sdo019807 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:05:55 +0100 Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:05:55 +0100 Message-Id: <200810311505.m9VF5sdo019807@smtp.upv.es> From: ICAS 2009 chair To: autoconf@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 081021-0, 21/10/2008), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Subject: [Autoconf] Deadline extension: ICAS 2009 | April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0830363547==" Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org --===============0830363547== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Note that the deadline for ICAS 2009 has been extended to November 10. Please consider to contribute to and/or forward to the appropriate groups the following opportunity to submit and publish original scientific results. Apologies for cross-postings. ============== ICAS 2009 | Call for Papers =============== CALL FOR PAPERS, TUTORIALS, PANELS ICAS 2009, The Fifth International Conference on Autonomic and Autonomous Systems April 21-25, 2009 - Valencia, Spain General page: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/ICAS09.html Call for Papers: http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/CfPICAS09.html Submission deadline: November 1, 2008 Submissions will be peer-reviewed, published by IEEE CPS, posted in IEEE Digital Library, and indexed with the major indexes. Extended versions of selected papers will be published in IARIA Journals: http://www.iariajournals.org Extended versions of selected papers will also be published in the Journal of Autonomous and Adaptive Communications Systems: https://www.inderscience.com/www/IJAACS_leaflet.pdf Please note the Poster Forum special submission with on progress and challenging ideas. ICAS 2009 Special Areas (details in the CfP on site): SYSAT: Advances in system automation AUTSY: Theory and practice of autonomous systems AWARE: Design and deployment of context-awareness networks, services and applications AUTONOMIC: Autonomic computing: design and management of self-behavioral networks and services CLOUD: Cloud computing and Virtualization MCMAC: Monitoring, control, and management of autonomous self-aware and context-aware systems CASES: Automation in specialized mobile environments ALCOC: Algorithms and theory for control and computation MODEL: Modeling, virtualization, any-on-demand, MDA, SOA SELF: Self-adaptability and self-management of context-aware systems KUI: Knowledge-based user interface AMMO: Adaptive management and mobility ================= ICAS 2009 Technical Program Committee Chairs Radu Calinescu, Oxford University, UK Mauricio Marin, Yahoo!, Chile Carlos Turro, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain AMMO Special area chairs: Fidel Liberal, University of the Basque Country, Spain Armando Ferro, University of the Basque Country, Spain ICAS General Chairs Lourdes Peñalver Herrero, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, Spain Jaime Lloret Mauri, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain ICAS 2009 Industry Chair Stefano Crosta, Cisco Systems, Inc., France Mikael Salaun, Orange-ftgroup, France Kevin Y Ung, Boeing, USA ICAS 2009 Demos Chair Mikael Salaun, Orange-ftgroup, France ICAS Advisory Chairs Petre Dini, Cisco Systems, Inc., USA / Concordia University, Canada Masayuki Murata, Osaka University, Japan Athanasios Vasilakos, University of Western Macedonia, Greece ================== --===============0830363547== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf --===============0830363547==--