Could item 3 - the architecture work item include the requirements for
mesh under as mentioned by Jonathan and should that be a single
document?
>From Pascal I inferred that we would postpone item 2 and the HC1g would
fall under updates to 4944.
geoff
On Fri, 2008-05-30 at 04:25 +0200, JP Vasseur wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just a suggestion for the chairs and the WG.
>
> We have discussed many important items for 6lowpan.
>
> For several of them, all important, I think that there was a clear
> agreement: statefull header compression, security, Architecture ID,
> fragmentation, ..... For other ones such as the “Mesh-under” and
> “Route over” discussion, there are diverging point of views.
>
> So why not trying to quickly re-charter adding the items for which
> there is a consensus and continue the discussion on the open issues in
> the meantime until we have an agreement at which point the WG may
> re-charter ?
>
> As we all know, the WG has been fairly slow in term of progress and it
> is I think now urgent to move on.
>
> Thoughts ?
>
> Thanks.
>
> JP.
> _______________________________________________
> 6lowpan mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
