Adding ROLL.
On 6/13/08 7:33 PM, "JP Vasseur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Geoff, > > > On 6/13/08 7:25 PM, "Geoff Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> JP, >> As I said previously, when Carsten, Mark and I reviewed the >> comments/messages on the list it was clear that ND, Architecture, and >> Security were priority items along with dealing with enhancements to >> compression of non link local addresses and that there was clear support >> to take these on within the working group. And now also the Use Cases >> draft. >> >> I am less certain that there is consensus that fragment recovery is a >> necessary working group item at this point. So I will ask the WG. >> >> As to your question about the Arch doc, I'm not sure that I understand >> the question or the timing? The text for this hasn't changed for >> months. It seems that there are members of the WG that want to see the >> architectural description that includes both a mesh under solution and a >> route over. How would you propose that we determine if there is a need >> for both? > > My proposal would be to have a discussion on this topic first, trying to > reach a consensus in the WG on whether or not we need to define a mesh-under > solution. Once we have reached a consensus, then move on and start to > incorporate it as part of the architecture ID or another document. > > In term of routing requirement ID, I would suggest: > * To move ahead with the 6lowpan specific requirement ID, owned by the > 6lowpan WG and reviewed by ROLL, > * hold-off on the mesh-under routing requirements until we have reached a > consensus. > > Makes sense ? > > Thanks. > > JP. > >> >> geoff >> >> On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 18:01 +0200, JP Vasseur wrote: >>> Hi Geoff, >>> >>> Thanks for sending out the new revision. One question, one comment. >>> >>> Question: could you explain the rationale for leaving out the fragmentation >>> recovery item? >>> >>> Comment: >>> >>> "3. Produce "6LoWPAN Architecture" to describe the design and >>> implementation of 6LoWPAN networks. This document will cover the >>> concepts of "Mesh Under" and "Route Over", 802.15.4 design issues such >>> as operation with sleeping nodes, network components (both battery- >>> and line-powered), addressing, and IPv4/IPv6 network connections. >>> As a spin-off from that document, "6LoWPAN Routing Requirements" will >>> describe 6LoWPAN-specific requirements on routing protocols used in >>> 6LoWPANs, addressing both the "route-over" and "mesh-under" approach. >>> Both documents will be informational." >>> >>> I do not understand the rationale here: I think that we should first >>> determine whether we both need a mesh-under *and* a route-over approach. You >>> know my opinion: we have numerous examples in the past of such approaches >>> that ALL failed for obvious technical reasons but this is my technical >>> opinion. As far as 6lowpan is concerned, shouldn't we first have a >>> discussion to get a consensus there ? *If* it turns out that both are >>> needed, then add an introductory section in the architecture document >>> pointing to the requirement document(s). >>> >>> Thus I would rather suggest not to list this as a WG item but to leave it >>> out for the moment and continue to have the discussion until we have a >>> consensus. Then at that point we could decide what to do. On the other hand, >>> having a separate documents listing the 6LoWPAN specific routing >>> requirements, owned by the 6lowpan WG and reviewed by ROLL would make a lot >>> of sense. >>> >>> Thoughts ? >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> JP. >>> >>> >>> >>> On 6/13/08 3:59 PM, "Geoff Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> With the input from the authors we've put the "Use Cases" back into the >>>> text for the charter for the working group with a delivery date of Dec >>>> 08. >>>> >>>> Attached is the NEW new charter text. >>>> >>>> geoff >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 6lowpan mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan >> > > _______________________________________________ > 6lowpan mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
