I guess Mark is asking for the working group to adopt the architecture document. The document has been posted by Tim today, I believe. Obviously people have to take a look before they can decide.
In any case, the file name or formal adoption is not as important as talking about the contents. I'm one of the authors of the new document and would like to provide some background on what we put into the document. First off, the document is a further development of the one that Mark and I wrote earlier in the summer. When he and started out to write that document, our ambition was to "just specify what the architecture is" :-) But as usual, when we worked more on it and with all the discussions in Quebec and on the list, we realized how hard the subject is. The intent of the new document is to talk about specific topics within the architecture (such as subnet size) and present the various factors that affect the topic, rather than provide a ready-made recommendation (such as using largest possible subnets). We thought that this would be useful input in preparation for our meeting, and perhaps in the meeting we can make some progress in actually selecting the direction. For now, the most important feedback on the document would be if we have covered the important topics and correctly explained the factors affecting them. I'm sure we have missed plenty, so please send contributions! Jari _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
