Bootstrapping is one of important issues around 6lowpan, hence I agree with Samita's suggestion as well.
Regarding 6lowpan mobility, MANEMO looks like a relevant place within IETF as of today, but INT AD's decision does not allow us to have a BOF in Prague at this stage. Anyhow, I am suggesting 6lowpan mobility for further study as one of rechartering items. As Samita pointed out, its problem statements are already available and we are in the progress of ellaborating on that. Daniel (Soohong Daniel Park) Mobile Convergence Laboratory, SAMSUNG Electronics. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Samita Chakrabarti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Geoff Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "6lowpan" <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 3:53 AM Subject: Re: [6lowpan] WG rechartering > Hi Geoff, > > The list looks good. > > Last time we also discussed a need for a document on boot-strapping. > Is it still on the agenda? Personally I prefer bootstrapping should be a > separate document; we also have to figure out the requirements for > bootstrapping in this space. > > The second point is on mobility analysis - recently with MANEMO (Network > mobility for MANET) discussion, some interesting points came out regarding > 6lowpan mobility. Daniel Park, Jim Bound brought this up and > we are working on updating > my expired draft on 6lowpan mobility requirements. So, may be we can keep > mobility item in the radar if not on the charter list for now. > > Thanks, > -Samita > > > On 2/6/07, Geoff Mulligan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Folks, >> We have reached a milestone. We have submitted the Problem Statement >> document and the Format Document to our AD for publication. We have >> completed the original charter of the WG. >> >> Mark will review the documents and then submit them for IETF LC (2 >> weeks) and then IESG review and discussion, which will hopefully happen >> on the IESG telechat on March 8th. >> >> So now it is very important that we finalize our thoughts about >> rechartering the Working Group for new work, should we want to take on >> new work. >> >> Some of the items that people have indicated interest in working on: >> Neighbor Discovery and Secure Neighbor Discovery (proposed standard) >> Stateful header compression (informational) >> 6lowpan applications (informational) >> mesh routing (proposed standard) >> Security analysis (informational) >> >> If there are other ideas as to work the WG should be looking at, please >> send them to the list. If you think that we are finished, please send >> that to the list also. >> >> We plan to have a call with our AD next Monday the 12th and I would like >> to hear from the group before then. >> >> geoff >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 6lowpan mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan >> > > _______________________________________________ > 6lowpan mailing list > [email protected] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan > > _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
