Dear wg,
After a number of discussions with my co-chair, our AD and various authors,
here is how we would like to move forward wrt 4rd.
1) There is an observation that all the solutions on the table E, T & U
actually solve the stateless problem we started with.
There are differences, but it is unclear if those differences are really
significant. E and T are the original Encapsulation and Translation
proposals, U is an hybrid unifying solution.
2) We have already agreed back in Beijing that we would publish all necessary
documents. The issue here is the 'label' or 'status' those
documents have at IETF. In particular, do we want to publish them as
Experimental, Informational or Standard Track.
We are at the point now where we need to make progress. In Paris, we would like
to ask for presentations from the proponents of each candidate solution (E, T &
U).
Each presentation should cover an overview of the proposed solution, explain
how it compares to the others and make a case as why it should be the one on
the Standard Track. We will allocate 20 minutes for each presentation.
Then, we, chairs, would like to ask a series of questions to the working group.
In order to make this process transparent, here is the list of questions we
want to ask
and their sequence.
Q1: Without pre-supposing which one will be selected, do you agree to publish 1
of the 3 proposals on the Standard Track and publish the other(s) as
Informational if still asked to?
If the answer is NO, then the process stops and we will publish everything as
Experimental and come back in 12-24 months to see what gets adopted by the
market.
If the answer is YES, we move to the next question.
Q2: Do you believe that the WG should publish U as the one Standards Track
document?
If the answer is YES, the process stop, we put U on the Standard Track and
publish E & T as Informational.
If the answer is NO, we are left with E & T (U then might be abandoned or
published as Historical/Informational)
Q3: Which of E and T do you want to see moving on the standard track (you can
only express support for one)?
If there is a clear outcome from this question, we would publish that proposal
on the Standard Track and the other one as Informational.
If there is no clear consensus on this question, we will publish both E & T as
Experimental.
In the meantime, we would like to encourage discussion on the mailing list to
foster our common understanding of the various technologies and how they relate
to each other.
Alain & Yong, wg co-chairs.
_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
Softwires@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
