Hi Geoff: I think that the chairs also had the task to conclude with the ML whether we'd do the work on Backbone Router and on Fragment recovery in this group or not. I think the former at least does not require re-chartering since it used to be part of a WG doc. Yet, I have not seen that decision being made. Could you please trigger those threads? As a more generic item, do you envision re-chartering at all to take new work aboard?
Cheers, Pascal http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7011357/ > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Geoff Mulligan > Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 12:20 AM > To: 6lowpan > Subject: [6lowpan] agenda for upcoming IETF > > As you all should know the 6lowpan WG meeting is currently scheduled for > Tuesday afternoon 1520-1700 and we are looking for agenda items. > > There has been little or no discussion on our mailing list since the last IETF > meeting. > > Hopefully the ND and HC drafts are basically complete. The Use Case and > Routing Requirements drafts are moving forward. > > At the last meeting the other topic that seemed to have some traction in the > WG was working on other header compression techniques. We have two > different drafts on this topic: Carsten's generic header compression and > Colin's ICMP header compression. > > The other topic that hotly discussed atwas whether the group should work > on Mesh Under. > > Again we have had no discussion on our list about any of these topics. > > Besides the drafts from Carsten and Colin, we have had another draft on > global address compression. > > The meta topic we need to discuss both at the meeting and on this list - > Should we call it quits or should we recharter? > > Input??? > > 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
