Ron,
good input.
Let me just pick up on one of these points:
The IETF is quite wary about "architecture" documents.
(The OSI reference model is the textbook example here:
ISO did an architecture ["reference model"], and then, only when
defining the protocols, found out that the architecture didn't make
sense.
But it was too late to fix the architecture, so the bad layers limped
on until OSI finally died.
The really funny thing, of course, is that, in 2006, people are
*still* citing the layers of the defunct reference model...)
In the IETF, we tend to standardize functional components and leave
it to the market how to build "architectures" out of these.
Of course, that is not always possible.
Also, it may be necessary to have an (really: one or more)
architectures in mind when building components.
So, I'd welcome discussion of architecture(s). I'm just not sure we
actually want to "standardize" them.
Gruesse, Carsten
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
