Re: [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re-chartering
Mark Townsley <townsley@cisco.com> Mon, 09 June 2008 15:33 UTC
Return-Path: <6lowpan-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: 6lowpan-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-6lowpan-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB84A3A6AC0; Mon, 9 Jun 2008 08:33:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: 6lowpan@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6lowpan@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 901AE3A67F3 for <6lowpan@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Jun 2008 08:33:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.412
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.412 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.187, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MnBqg+iuqf55 for <6lowpan@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Jun 2008 08:33:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 190443A6A32 for <6lowpan@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Jun 2008 08:33:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-dkim-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.138]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Jun 2008 17:34:06 +0200
Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com (ams-core-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.150]) by ams-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m59FY6mK008444; Mon, 9 Jun 2008 17:34:06 +0200
Received: from xbh-ams-332.emea.cisco.com (xbh-ams-332.cisco.com [144.254.231.87]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m59FY60p019662; Mon, 9 Jun 2008 15:34:06 GMT
Received: from xfe-ams-331.emea.cisco.com ([144.254.231.72]) by xbh-ams-332.emea.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 9 Jun 2008 17:34:05 +0200
Received: from dhcp-144-254-57-206.cisco.com ([144.254.57.206]) by xfe-ams-331.emea.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 9 Jun 2008 17:34:05 +0200
Message-ID: <484D4D66.1060407@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 17:33:58 +0200
From: Mark Townsley <townsley@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Macintosh/20080421)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jonathan Hui <jhui@archrock.com>
References: <C465321D.3E894%jvasseur@cisco.com> <7892795E1A87F04CADFCCF41FADD00FC05C0E73A@xmb-ams-337.emea.cisco.com> <AEAFE253-6621-46D2-BF85-DEDC8FC41F83@archrock.com>
In-Reply-To: <AEAFE253-6621-46D2-BF85-DEDC8FC41F83@archrock.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jun 2008 15:34:05.0670 (UTC) FILETIME=[40615060:01C8CA46]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=3946; t=1213025646; x=1213889646; c=relaxed/simple; s=amsdkim1002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=townsley@cisco.com; z=From:=20Mark=20Townsley=20<townsley@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[6lowpan]=20A=20suggestion=20...=20With =20regards=20to=20re-chartering |Sender:=20; bh=Ie6CoISDQ1xa3N1F2Ugc3Sx5SNh4lsdCzNgaYi6lznY=; b=Fl/2qZaV0CjM2r3xi5mitHoR3bA/n5BS7KgKKdPxm7kJvxuIPzKu+4sIc1 191rbACogFzQ+dKatz7Xwt15i7mL85Mz412e6W2IavUIgUqoVEbLnGs6bjFs 9zKZu+g4LQ;
Authentication-Results: ams-dkim-1; header.From=townsley@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/amsdkim1002 verified; );
Cc: 6lowpan@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re-chartering
X-BeenThere: 6lowpan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working group discussion for IPv6 over LowPan networks <6lowpan.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan>, <mailto:6lowpan-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/6lowpan>
List-Post: <mailto:6lowpan@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6lowpan-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan>, <mailto:6lowpan-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: 6lowpan-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: 6lowpan-bounces@ietf.org
Jonathan Hui wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > In support of most of this. For ND, we should add work on route-over > as well, which I've committed to at the last WG meeting. Could you provide some charter text that would help quantify what you are willing to commit to here? > Architecture > is needed at this stage, and I'm willing to help drive it. Please do. - Mark > RFC 4944 > maintenance is needed as well. > > I still think we need some document to define requirements for a L2 > meshing over 802.15.4 subnetwork. As I've said before, this could be a > separate document or a part of the architecture document. > > I hope we can close on this quickly... > > -- > Jonathan Hui > > On May 30, 2008, at 5:48 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote: > > >> Hi JP >> >> Works with me. I went through the published work and the recent >> thread " >> New charter for 6lowpan". >> My conclusion is as follows: >> >> From the reworked charter, we should keep Work Items 1, 3, and 5 which >> appear of foremost importance, drop 2 and 4 because pragmatically we >> are >> not advanced enough in these areas. >> >> For 1) we have draft-chakrabarti-6lowpan-ipv6-nd that we can couple >> with >> draft-thubert-6lowpan-backbone-router and we have most of the >> content we >> need to make a standard track doc. >> >> For 3) we have draft-culler-6lowpan-architecture. It needs improvement >> in particular in explaining route over vs. mesh under in details as we >> currently discuss in the ML. Also mobility, backbone... but we have >> people interested in the discussion (see current threads) so we should >> work it out. >> >> For 5) we have draft-daniel-6lowpan-security-analysis. We need to make >> sure we have people committed to the effort but the current draft >> looks >> good already. >> >> To those 3, I'd add: >> >> Explore requirements and usages. >> --------------------------------- >> We have a draft, draft-ekim-6lowpan-scenarios that we can leverage. >> I'd >> add to it some words on existing standards that need or use 6LowPAN. >> In >> particular, we need to place ISA100 requirements in there to be able >> to >> better serve them later. >> >> RFC 4944 maintenance and improvements >> ------------------------------------- >> This should cover at least 6lowpan HC and fragment recovery efforts. >> We >> can discuss if we want ECN in that work item as well. >> >> What do you think? >> >> Pascal >> ________________________________________ >> From: 6lowpan-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:6lowpan-bounces@ietf.org] On >> Behalf Of Jean Philippe Vasseur (jvasseur) >> Sent: vendredi 30 mai 2008 04:25 >> To: 6lowpan@ietf.org >> Subject: [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re-chartering >> >> Hi, >> >> Just a suggestion for the chairs and the WG. >> >> We have discussed many important items for 6lowpan. >> >> For several of them, all important, I think that there was a clear >> agreement: stateful header compression, security, Architecture ID, >> fragmentation, ..... For other ones such as the "Mesh-under" and >> "Route >> over" discussion, there are diverging point of views. >> >> So why not trying to quickly re-charter adding the items for which >> there >> is a consensus and continue the discussion on the open issues in the >> meantime until we have an agreement at which point the WG may re- >> charter >> ? >> >> As we all know, the WG has been fairly slow in term of progress and it >> is I think now urgent to move on. >> >> Thoughts ? >> >> Thanks. >> >> JP. >> _______________________________________________ >> 6lowpan mailing list >> 6lowpan@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan >> > > _______________________________________________ > 6lowpan mailing list > 6lowpan@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan > > _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list 6lowpan@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
- [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re-cha… JP Vasseur
- Re: [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re… Daniel Park
- Re: [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re… Jonathan Hui
- Re: [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re… Jonathan Hui
- Re: [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re… Geoff Mulligan
- Re: [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re… Geoff Mulligan
- Re: [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re… Geoff Mulligan
- Re: [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re… JP Vasseur
- Re: [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re… JP Vasseur
- Re: [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re… JP Vasseur
- Re: [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re… JP Vasseur
- Re: [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re… Mark Townsley
- Re: [6lowpan] A suggestion ... With regards to re… Samita Chakrabarti