> Subject: Re: [6lowpan] Working Group Charter
> From: Geoff Mulligan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 22:20:32 -0600
>
> What do you mean "that we have no intention of actually implementing
> IPv6 in wireless PANs". We have every intention of implementing IPv6 in
> wireless PANs!
The working group arguably isn't implementing IPv6 from two perspectives:
o I don't think the IETF accepts the notion that implementing
a subset of IPv6 is actually implementing IPv6. But, I could
be wrong. I may ask this on question on the main IETF mail list.
Having said that, the working group intends to implement
only a subset of IPv6, (e.g., no IPsec, no mobile IP, etc).
o The protocol described in the format specification is not
IPv6. If you fed it into an IPv6 stack, nothing good would
happen. It is, however, a protocol that can easily be
transformed into [a subset of] IPv6.
> In fact WE (Invensys and some other companies) already have and WE
> (Invensys) have it deployed in a significant number of homes in pilots
> in the US right now.
See above.
> I do not agree with the wording for your suggested Charter changes,
> though I do truly appreciate that someone is starting some sort of
> exchange on the list.
Feel free to suggest alternative language and ideas.
-tjs
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
