6bone Prequalification for Sub-TLA assignment

[Jim Bound]

Seth,

>> I don't think the IETF (the entity) is associated with the 6bone in a
>> manner that would cause one to have concern, and we should clear that up
>> if folks do think this.  The people working on the 6bone also
>> participate in the IETF, and the work is presented at IETF meetings but 
>> the IETF does not bless or veto stuff we do on the 6bone?  Or am I missing 
>> something more subtle?
>
>The 6bone is an IETF activity:
>
>http://www.6bone.net/
>
>   The 6bone is an IPv6 testbed to assist in the evolution and deployment
>   of IPv6, often referred to as IPng ..., in the Internet.  The 6bone
>   activity is part of the ngtrans effort under the IETF.

Well this is written wrong IMO and should say in the last sentence.

The 6bone activity is an effort by implementors to assist with verifying
the work on IPv6 within the IETF.  State and evolution of this activity
is discussed and reported on at the IETF ngtrans WG.

For example if we want to expand the 6bone to connect to StarWars
Network on Planet Mars we don't have to go get approval from the IETF or
the IESG.  As their job is to work on protocols and operational
characteristics of those protocols.  It is the 6bone participants that
make the decisions and direction of the 6bone not the IETF.  

So the above sentence is wrong IMO.

http://www.6bone.net/ngtrans/

   The IPng Transition (ngtrans) working group of the IETF is under the
   Operations and Management Area, and has as its overall goal assisting
   in and promoting the transition to IPv6, the next generation Internet
   protocol chosen by the IETF community.
   
   Current ngtrans efforts are divided into two separate activities:
   tools and the 6bone.

This is clearly wrong because the IESG or IAB got nothing to say about
how we operate and promote the 6bone.

Thanks for catching this error.

So how do we fix this?

I suggest we update the wording at both places.

thanks
/jim