Cool On Dec 16, 2010, at 4:48 PM, Don Sturek wrote:
> Hi Fred, > > Thanks for the note. We (the ZigBee team) will create a test report for > what we have tested. Should have a draft soon (we will try to have > something by the end of next week since we already have the test reports and > just need to recast them as a draft and highlight the v6man draft tests) > > Don > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Fred Baker [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 3:56 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: 'Brian Haberman'; 'IPv6 WG Mailing List'; 'JP Vasseur' > Subject: Re: Lack of responses on WG Last Calls > > Don - see > > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1246.txt > 1246 Experience with the OSPF Protocol. J. Moy. July 1991. (Format: > TXT=70441, PS=141924, PDF=84633 bytes) (Also RFC1247, RFC1245) > (Status: INFORMATIONAL) > > When we advance a routing protocol to Proposed Standard, for reasons related > to ancient IESG history related to routing, we generally require a test > report that shows interoperable implementations of the standard in question. > As you can imagine, there was an NDA around the various events RFC 1246 > reports - you won't find comments on the fact that Cisco's initial > implementation of OSPF was a demon's delight, but you will find comments on > who tested, and what the outcome of the testing was after we (yes, I was > there, while working at ACC) all fixed our bugs. > > It would be very helpful if you could, with the implementors in question, > filed a report on the testing. > > On Dec 16, 2010, at 6:27 AM, Don Sturek wrote: > >> Hi Brian, >> >> Don Sturek, chair for the ZigBee Alliance IPv6 standardization. >> >> We are using both the drafts (draft-hui-6man-rpl-headers and >> draft-ietf-6man-rpl-routing-header) for our interoperability testing. > Here >> is some background: >> 1) We have 9 implementing companies all doing non-storing ROLL RPL using >> downward routing >> 2) We started interop testing in January 2010, meet every month and have >> been testing downward routing for around 4 months >> 3) We have not run into any issues (we have contact with Jonathan Hui and >> JP so may have let them know of any issues but I don't recall them). I > can >> send you one of our recent interop reports under our ZigBee-IETF liaison >> agreement if you are interested. >> >> We would be interested in seeing these drafts move forward in the WG. We >> think they are essential to implementing non-storing ROLL RPL. By the > way, >> our target deployment is for Smart Metering applications in the home area >> network. I added Fred Baker who chairs the Smart Power group who is aware >> of our work. >> >> Sorry for not letting you know about this earlier. >> >> Best, >> >> Don Sturek >> Chair, ZigBee Core Stack Working Group (responsible for standardization of >> the "ZigBee IP") >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >> Brian Haberman >> Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 5:53 AM >> To: IPv6 WG Mailing List >> Subject: Lack of responses on WG Last Calls >> >> All, >> Working group last calls ended 10 days ago for the two RPL-related >> drafts (draft-ietf-6man-rpl-option and >> draft-ietf-6man-rpl-routing-header). By my count, each draft received >> *1* comment. The chairs cannot and will not advance a draft to the IESG >> with so little feedback. We request that WG participants review these >> drafts and provide their feedback on them. >> >> Regards, >> Brian & Bob >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >> [email protected] >> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
