It would be appreciated if someone can answer to my technical review of GHC draft which I sent to the list:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6lowpan/current/msg03513.html Thanks, Yoshihiro Ohba (2012/08/25 13:58), Carsten Bormann wrote: > I don't know -- it could be handled as AD sponsored. I'm confident we'll > find a way. > > More interesting is *when* it should go. I'm in the process of obtaining > research results that might improve the performance with DTLS packets a bit > (with minimal implementation impact). We could rush GHC before that is > complete, wait a couple of months for these results, or even try to get more > input. What is the best timing? We need input from implementers to decide > this. > > Sent from Mobile > > On 24.08.2012, at 21:52, Michael Richardson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >>>>>>> "Carsten" == Carsten Bormann <[email protected]> writes: >> Carsten> Changing to WG chair mode for a moment: >> >> Carsten> The 6LoWPAN WG is alive and well and is in the process of >> Carsten> closing its remaining two work items (6LoWPAN-ND, 6LoWPAN >> Carsten> for BTLE). >> >> Carsten> However, you are right in that the 6LoWPAN WG no longer takes >> new work on. >> Carsten> The chairs, with the ADs and the chairs of other WGs, will >> Carsten> ensure that interesting work finds an appropriate home. >> >> ...? where will GHC go? >> >> -- >> Michael Richardson >> -at the cottage- >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
