Re: [6lo] Conclusion of adoption call for draft-li-6lo-native-short-address-03

Thanks Carles this is a nice summary of the discussion.

We will work to address the issues identified and also follow up on Pascal's proposal.

Ciao

L.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: 6lo <6lo-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Carles Gomez Montenegro
> Sent: Monday, 29 August 2022 08:45
> To: 6lo@ietf.org
> Subject: [6lo] Conclusion of adoption call for draft-li-6lo-native-short-
> address-03
> 
> Dear 6lo WG,
> 
> First of all, we would like to thank everyone who replied to the call for
> adoption for draft-li-6lo-native-short-address-03 (also referred to as “the
> draft” or “this work” in this message). The discussion has been thorough,
> useful and productive.
> 
> Several WG participants have expressed their support for draft-li-6lo-native-
> short-address-03. However, several issues and concerns have also been
> raised.
> 
> Since what has been considered is WG adoption, not all the issues are
> expected to be addressed at this time. However, some of the issues are
> rather fundamental and relevant to the call for adoption.
> 
> The issues that are relevant to the call for adoption include:
> 
> 1. Clarifying and/or better detailing the motivation for the draft and its
> expected applicability (in terms of use cases, scenarios and underlying
> technologies).
> 
> 2. Clarifying the expected advantages of this work in comparison with
> existing functionality. Two main areas to consider are: i) header compression
> (e.g. comparing with 6LoWPAN or SCHC header compression), and ii)
> multihop delivery (e.g. comparing with RPL, use of BIER, etc.).
> 
> 3. Clarifying whether the work is actually in scope for 6lo (e.g. not rather L2
> work).
> 
> Considering the above issues, we understand that the draft cannot be
> adopted in its current form (draft-li-6lo-native-short-address-03) and at this
> time.
> 
> However, Pascal proposed in one of his last messages of the call for adoption
> thread [1] a possible way forward that may contribute to address issues 2
> and 3. His proposal appears to: i) allow to better integrate this work within
> the 6LoWPAN framework, ii) make this work become a 6LoWPAN extension
> for some particular scenarios, iii) allow reuse of existing IETF technology on
> top of this work, and iv) clarify that the work is in scope for 6lo.
> 
> We encourage the authors to carefully consider the feedback received
> during the call for adoption in order to update the draft. We also encourage
> the WG participants, especially those who raised the main issues, to follow
> the progress of this work and provide feedback.
> 
> If/Once the main issues expressed in the call for adoption have been
> sufficiently addressed, a second call for adoption can be issued in the future.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Shwetha and Carles
> 
> [1]
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6lo/HRPlHb82qPDBb0G9GsP8nCsfwhI
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 6lo mailing list
> 6lo@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo