Subject: New proposal for multi6 interim meeting

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2004 19:07:29 +0200

It has proved very hard to find a date and place that suits everybody
for the planned interim meeting. Apologies to those whose preferences 
will not be satisfied.

After analyzing the various responses received, we now propose a
one day meeting on Monday June 14 in California, either Santa Monica
or the Bay Area.

This is the day of the tutorials at the IPv6 Summit in Santa Monica;
hence we will minimize travel for at least some participants, and we assume
that active participants in multi6 won't be attending the tutorials.

Please reply to me (not the list) with a simple "yes/no" within a day or
two, so that we can confirm this ASAP.

Regards
    Brian + Kurtis
    co-chairs

Agenda headlines
================

 "Things to think about" draft (next version)
 Threats draft(s) (next version)
 Architecture draft (still to come) + discussion
 Discussion on the impact of various categories of solutions.
 Outcome of meeting and where to move from here.

---

From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2004 19:24:28 +0200

> one day meeting on Monday June 14 in California, either Santa Monica

Is it useful to have an interim meeting 6 weeks before the next IETF 
meeting? This leaves no time to publish new drafts.

Also, having both the interim meeting and the next IETF meeting in more 
or less the same place distributes the travel burden very unevenly.

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 11:11:01 +0200

> meeting? This leaves no time to publish new drafts.

We believe that a full day of meeting is the only way to make
progress. Since the main output should be a revision of the
(future) architectural analysis, I can't see why publication
of an update would be impossible.

> or less the same place distributes the travel burden very unevenly.

That is true. But it's the best compromise we could find.

   Brian

---

From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 11:14:31 +0200

> meeting? This leaves no time to publish new drafts.

The intention of the interim meetings is to meet and discuss two drafts 
that might make it to WG documents and have a through discussion on the 
architectural analysis draft. I don't think these discussions will 
trigger the need for new drafts, but they might trigger updates of 
existing ones. And for that there should be enough time.

I do agree it's tight, but we (Brian should get the credits for this 
thoguh) have really struggled to find suitable dates.

> Also, having both the interim meeting and the next IETF meeting in 
> more or less the same place distributes the travel burden very 
> unevenly.

I agree, but this was the way most people could attend. :-(

- - kurtis -