While I agree with the chairs and the WG that the flow ID work must be completed,
and I agree with you that the expertise in other IETF areas can be very useful to
get the flow label work going, I am concerned that the work
has less of a chance to be completed without a specific WG to do it.
The "TraffiC Class" field is an example where things worked well: the output from
the Diff-Serv WG affects directly
the field.
Did you have in mind something similar when you made the suggestion?
Alex
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> I can't hekp wondering whether the flow label issue should be sent off
> to the Transport area for consideration.
>
> Brian
>
> Bob Hinden wrote:
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > Attached is a draft of a revised charter for the working group. Updating
> > the charter was agreed to at the Grenoble and Minneapolis working group
> > meetings, but it took the chairs and AD's a while to draft a new one.
> >
> > The charter includes changing the name of the working group to the "IP
> > Version 6 Working Group", but will keep the acronym of "ipngwg". This will
> > avoid having to rename all current internet drafts.
> >
> > Please send comments on the new charter to the mailing list. There will be
> > a short session in Pittsburgh to discuss it as well.
> >
> > Bob Hinden / Steve Deering
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Draft - Draft - Draft - Draft - Draft - Draft - Draft - Draft - Draft - Draft
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > IP Version 6 Working Group (ipngwg) *** note: change of name but not acronym
> >
> > Chair(s):
> >
> > Bob Hinden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Steve Deering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Document Editor
> >
> > Bob Hinden ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> >
> > Internet Area Director(s):
> >
> > Thomas Narten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Erik Nordmark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Internet Area Advisor:
> >
> > Thomas Narten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Mailing Lists:
> >
> > General Discussion:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > In Body: in body: subscribe ipng
> > Archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng/mail-archive
> >
> > Description of Working Group:
> >
> > IP version 6 or IPv6 (also formerly known as IP Next Generation or IPng)
> > is intended to support the continued growth of the Internet, both in
> > size and capabilities, by offering a greatly increased IP address space
> > and other enhancements over IPv4. The working group was originally
> > chartered to implement the recommendations of the IPng Area Directors
> > as outlined at the July 1994 IETF meeting and in "The Recommendation
> > for the IP Next Generation Protocol," RFC1752, January 1995. Most of
> > the tasks in that original charter have been completed, and the core
> > IPv6 protocol specifications are now on the IETF standards track.
> > The working group's ongoing responsibilities are as follows:
> >
> > - Complete work from the original charter and follow-on work, as
> > outlined below.
> >
> > - Keep all IPv6 working group documents moving along publication /
> > standardization track.
> >
> > - Serve as a review board and body of competence and coordination for
> > IPv6 architectural issues that span multiple IETF working groups.
> >
> > - Provide a home for IPv6-related work that doesn't fit in an existing
> > IETF working group and doesn't merit a working group of its own.
> >
> > - Provide technical input to ICANN, Internet Address Registries, and
> > IANA with regard to IPv6 address allocation policies and procedures.
> >
> > - Provide technical input and review to IANA with regard to IPv6
> > protocol and parameter assignments.
> >
> > The list of the working group's current work items is as follows:
> >
> > - Revise ICMPv6 spec (scope-exceeded err, no error to redirect,
> > editorial)
> > - Revise Generic Tunneling spec (add bidirectional tunnels)
> > - Update Basic and Advanced API specs
> > - Complete Router Renumbering spec
> > - Complete Scoped Address Architecture spec and any necessary revisions
> > to other working group drafts required to properly implement support
> > for IPv6 address scoping
> > - Complete work on recommended address-selection algorithms
> > - Work on new solutions to site-multihoming problems, possibly including
> > both host-based and router-based solutions.
> > - Complete work on local IPv6 networking as part of IPv6 plug-and-play
> > - Complete work on privacy extensions to stateless address configuration
> > - Document IPv6 renumbering model
> > - Complete the GSE Analysis document
> > - Complete the Inverse Neighbor Discovery spec
> > - Complete the IPv6 Node Information Queries spec
> > - Complete MIB specs as required by any working group protocol specs
> >
> > New work items not listed above require the approval of the working
> > group and Internet Area directors before they will be taken on by the
> > working group.
> >
> > The working group would welcome contributions on the following topics
> > (this is not an exhaustive list):
> >
> > - Flow label standardization
> > - Solutions to other multihoming issues, beyond those specific to
> > site-multihoming
> > - Integration of autoconfiguration, mobility, DNS, service discovery
> > and other technologies to enhance IPv6 plug-and-play
> > - IPv6 dial-up issues relating to address assignment, use of Neighbor
> > Discovery, etc. (not including AAA work)
> > - Specifications for IPv6 over additional media
> > - Extending MLD to include functionality of IGMPv3
> > - Host use of anycast; TCP use of anycast
> > - Support for multi-link subnets (single subnet spans multiple links)
> > - Scope-name discovery
> > - IPv6 protocol extensions to accommodate mobile wireless networks.
> >
> > Goals and Milestones:
> >
> > Aug 2000 Complete MLD MIB and submit for Proposed Standard
> >
> > Aug 2000 Complete privacy extensions specification and submit for
> > Proposed Standard
> >
> > Aug 2000 Completed revision of GSE Analysis document and resubmit
> > for Informational
> >
> > Aug 2000 Complete the Inverse Neighbor Discovery specification
> > and submit for Proposed Standard
> >
> > Aug 2000 Complete IPv6 Multihoming with Route Aggregation and submit
> > for Informational.
> >
> > Oct 2000 Update ICMP document and resubmit for Draft Standard
> >
> > Oct 2000 Update Generic Tunneling specification and resubmit for
> > Proposed Standard
> >
> > Oct 2000 Complete updates to Basic and Advanced API specifications
> > and submit for Informational
> >
> > Dec 2000 Complete Scoped Address Architecture and submit for Proposed
> > Standard
> >
> > Dec 2000 Compete Address Selection specification and submit for Proposed
> > Standard
> >
> > Dec 2000 Complete Local IPv6 Networking Specification and submit for
> > Proposed Standard
> >
> > Dec 2000 Complete the IPv6 Node Information Queries specification
> > and submit for Proposed Standard
> >
> > Mar 2001 Complete IPv6 renumbering model document and submit for
> > Informational
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Draft - Draft - Draft - Draft - Draft - Draft - Draft - Draft - Draft - Draft
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
> > IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
> > FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
> > Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
> IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
> FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
> Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
