Re: [6lowapp] Proposed charter for 6LoWAPP BOF

[Lisa Dusseault <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Arjun Roychowdhury
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> So my comment would be if this is not so, then it needs to be explicitly
> stated, otherwise the natural understanding is 6lowapp is the application
> protocol group for 6lowpan devices - and what comes out of here, would
> likely be adopted going forward in deployments,

Fair enough, and I think there has been some talk of choosing a name
for the WG that would not imply so large a scope as the BOF does.

> I can respond to your other comments in more detail, but then again, if the
> scope is going to be limited, then so be it.

The discussion is still open about what the limited scope is going to
be however!  I did not mean to shut down debate but to channel it
early towards picking part of the 80% value according to the 80/20
rule, or alternately to pick the most important pieces to build first.

BTW, there has already been discussion about further splitting up the
work besides just 6LOWPAN and whatever WG is spun off by a 6LOWAPP
BOF; I wouldn't be surprised at if we saw another charter proposed by
next summer, if not sooner.

Lisa