1. Slide title In CAPITALS 50 pt Slide subtitle 32 pt DNA wg meeting @ IETF71

2. Top right corner for field-mark, customer or partner logotypes. See Best practice for example. Slide title 40 pt Slide subtitle 24 pt Text 24 pt Bullets level 2-5 20 pt © Ericsson AB 2008DNA Chair Slides2008-03-122 Note Well  Any submission to the IETF intended by the Contributor for publication as all or part of an IETF Internet-Draft or RFC and any statement made within the context of an IETF activity is considered an "IETF Contribution". Such statements include oral statements in IETF sessions, as well as written and electronic communications made at any time or place, which are addressed to:  -the IETF plenary session,  -any IETF working group or portion thereof,  -the IESG or any member thereof on behalf of the IESG,  -the IAB or any member thereof on behalf of the IAB,  -any IETF mailing list, including the IETF list itself,  any working group or design team list, or any other list  functioning under IETF auspices,  -the RFC Editor or the Internet-Drafts function  All IETF Contributions are subject to the rules of RFC 3978 (updated by RFC 4748) and RFC 3979(updated by RFC 4879).  Statements made outside of an IETF session, mailing list or other function, that are clearly not intended to be input to an IETF activity, group or function, are not IETF Contributions in the context of this notice.  Please consult RFC 3978 (and RFC 4748) for details.  A participant in any IETF activity is deemed to accept all IETF rules of process, as documented in Best Current Practices RFCs and IESG Statements.  A participant in any IETF activity acknowledges that written, audio and video records of meetings may be made and may be available to the public.

3. Top right corner for field-mark, customer or partner logotypes. See Best practice for example. Slide title 40 pt Slide subtitle 24 pt Text 24 pt Bullets level 2-5 20 pt © Ericsson AB 2008DNA Chair Slides2008-03-123 Agenda  15:10 Agenda bashing - 2 minutes  15:12 Document status and scribes - 3 minutes  15:15 Simple DNA protocol presentation - 15 minutes  15:30 Simple DNA protocol discussion - 20 minutes –Call for adoption and measuring consensus (Jari Arkko)  15:50 Tentative options - 5 minutes  15:55 Way forward with complete DNA solution - 5 minutes

4. Top right corner for field-mark, customer or partner logotypes. See Best practice for example. Slide title 40 pt Slide subtitle 24 pt Text 24 pt Bullets level 2-5 20 pt © Ericsson AB 2008DNA Chair Slides2008-03-124 WG document status  draft-ietf-dna-protocol –In v07 –Pending reclassification to Experimental –Will be discussed in wg  draft-ietf-dna-tentative –Expired –Used for Optimistic DAD (RFC4429) –Will be revved  draft-ietf-dna-frd –Expired –Will be revved once the protocol goal is achieved

5. Top right corner for field-mark, customer or partner logotypes. See Best practice for example. Slide title 40 pt Slide subtitle 24 pt Text 24 pt Bullets level 2-5 20 pt © Ericsson AB 2008DNA Chair Slides2008-03-125 Adoption call  Should we adopt draft-krishnan-dna-simple-03 as WG document? –Yes. (It is a good starting point for a deployable solution) –No. (Kill it, the fundamental approach is wrong) –Not ready. (The fundamental approach is OK but a much better procedure exists for doing the same thing)

6. Top right corner for field-mark, customer or partner logotypes. See Best practice for example. Slide title 40 pt Slide subtitle 24 pt Text 24 pt Bullets level 2-5 20 pt © Ericsson AB 2008DNA Chair Slides2008-03-126 Consensus call  Should we reclassify draft-ietf-dna-protocol-07 to Experimental? –Yes. –No.  Should we continue working on the tentative options in the dna wg –Yes. –No, punt them off to 6man

7. Top right corner for field-mark, customer or partner logotypes. See Best practice for example. Slide title 40 pt Slide subtitle 24 pt Text 24 pt Bullets level 2-5 20 pt © Ericsson AB 2008DNA Chair Slides2008-03-127 Reviews  Thanks to –Bernard Aboba, –Thomas Narten, –Jari Arkko, –Jin Hyeock Choi, and –Julien Laganier for their reviews.  We need more eyes on the document. –If you volunteer, I promise you some nice cookies next meeting

8. Slide title In CAPITALS 50 pt Slide subtitle 32 pt Thanks for attending Questions? Comments?