6to4 Provider Managed Tunnels
draft-kuarsingh-v6ops-6to4-provider-managed-tunnel-07

[Ballot discuss]

2 discuss-discussses (for the IESG, not the authors/ISE, and should be
sorted out on the call):

1) what's the story with ISE or IETF submissions where the patent application
can't yet be seen (is that the case here? I couldn't see it anyway). Even with
a MAD declaration, how could someone know what things from the RFC are relevant
before the RFC issues if the patent application isn't (yet) public? This was
recently discussed on apps-discuss about another I-D and opinions were stated
that appsawg ought wait until the patent applicaiton in that case was published
before adopting a draft. I guess one might argue that having the ISE put out an
encumbered RFC might impinge on the IETF if we can't know detalis of the
encumbrence before the RFC issues, in that the RRC might get widely deployed
then come back to the IETF with the encumbrance now a fait accompli. So I just
want to check if that particular wrinke has been thrashed out before or not.

2) Was this on the agenda "for-action" but is now on for approval? Given the
author/AD/IPR confluence perhaps this ought not be taken a telechat earlier
than usual, just to avoid any impression of something encumbered being fast
tracked?  I'm fine with that given the light agenda, but it might still be
worth a 2-week wait just so this isn't an oddity if someone ever looks back to
the history?

[Ballot comment]

I am personally amazed that there's anything here that can be patented
without leading to frequent embarassed silences in the presence of the
"inventors". They (the "inventors") have my sympathy for when they suffer
that. Either that, or else the invention is so good its not obvious to someone
skilled in the art even after reading the draft, but I tend to wonder. (Again,
no action required here, just a comment in passing on a lamentable part
of how our industry is generally behaving these days.)

The draft draft-kuarsingh-v6ops-6to4-provider-managEd-tunnel-06
is ready for publication from the Independent Stream.
Please ask IESG to review it, as set out in RFC 5742.

The following is some background for this draft, please forward it
to IESG along with this request ...

This I-D's abstract says:
6to4 Provider Managed Tunnels (6to4-PMT) provide a framework which
can help manage 6to4 [RFC3056] tunnels operating in an anycast
[RFC3068] configuration. The 6to4-PMT framework is intended to serve
as an option to operators to help improve the experience of 6to4
operation when conditions of the network may provide sub-optimal
performance or break normal 6to4 operation.

It was reviewed for me by Brian Carpenter, the author has revised
it in response to Brian's comments.


Thanks, Nevil (ISE)