Re: [6lowpan] [Roll] draft-kelsey-intarea-mesh-link-establishment-03.txt

Thomas Heide Clausen <ietf@thomasclausen.org> Fri, 15 June 2012 17:50 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@thomasclausen.org>
X-Original-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEA3121F8658; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 10:50:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.869
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.869 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id feL3ql5p6Mmh; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 10:50:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from morbo.mail.tigertech.net (morbo.mail.tigertech.net [67.131.251.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F89821F850B; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 10:50:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailc2.tigertech.net (mailc2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.156]) by morbo.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41D125580D9; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 10:50:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailc2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3BB91BE16A6; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 10:50:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at c2.tigertech.net
Received: from [10.147.40.163] (37-8-181-55.coucou-networks.fr [37.8.181.55]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailc2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5A5381BE16A5; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 10:50:32 -0700 (PDT)
References: <CC00B369.170E9%d.sturek@att.net> <6EBA154B-EFDC-4E46-B04F-D86546B4F07E@thomasclausen.org> <87lijojx19.fsf@kelsey-ws.hq.ember.com>
In-Reply-To: <87lijojx19.fsf@kelsey-ws.hq.ember.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-Id: <A17E82D5-E03B-46E5-B8EB-561A2460AF22@thomasclausen.org>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (9B206)
From: Thomas Heide Clausen <ietf@thomasclausen.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 19:50:41 +0200
To: Richard Kelsey <richard.kelsey@ember.com>
Cc: "<mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>" <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, "<roll@ietf.org>" <roll@ietf.org>, "<6lowpan@ietf.org>" <6lowpan@ietf.org>, "<ipv6@ietf.org>" <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [6lowpan] [Roll] draft-kelsey-intarea-mesh-link-establishment-03.txt
X-BeenThere: 6lowpan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working group discussion for IPv6 over LowPan networks <6lowpan.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6lowpan>, <mailto:6lowpan-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 17:50:34 -0000

Dear Richard,

Thank you for the clarifications, I appreciate it.

I look forward to the next version, which I will endeavor to review carefully with what you state below in mind.

Best,

Thomas

-- 
Thomas Heide Clausen
http://www.thomasclausen.org/

"Any simple problem can be made insoluble if enough meetings are held to
 discuss it."
   -- Mitchell's Law of Committees


On 15 Jun 2012, at 19:38, Richard Kelsey <richard.kelsey@ember.com> wrote:

> Hi Thomas,
> 
> As Don said, the intent is that MLE not be tied to RPL and that
> it be submitted as an AD-sponsored submission.  I have spoken
> with Ralph about it on several occasions.  We both would have
> preferred that MLE go through a WG, but there doesn't seem to be
> an appropriate one.  If MLE were intended for use exclusively
> with ROLL (or MANET or 6LoWPAN), this wouldn't be an issue.
> 
> Ralph and I discussed it again yesterday, and decided to go with
> an AD-sponsored submission.  My plan was to add some clarifications
> to the draft before announcing it to the usual suspects (6lowpan,
> MANET, ROLL).  This thread jumped the gun by a day or two.
> 
>                                  -Richard Kelsey
> 
>> From: Thomas Heide Clausen <ietf@thomasclausen.org>
>> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 18:59:18 +0200
>> 
>> Hi Don,
>> 
>> On 15 Jun 2012, at 18:41, Don Sturek <d.sturek@att.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Thomas,
>>> 
>>> I think our plan was to submit it to the Internet Area directly (Richard:
>>> That is from memory, am I correct?)
>>> 
>> 
>> If that's the case, then I think that it needs to be scoped
>> carefully: the design and direction of the work required would
>> (IMO) be very different if it aims narrowly for RPL, or broadly
>> for "MESH", and the text in the specification should be very
>> very clear as to this.
>> 
>> If an AD sponsored submission is the intend, then I do honestly
>> not know what the proper way of shaping the process / forum for
>> discussions / framing of the specification would be, but I
>> would hope that an AD could chirp in (as you say INT, have you
>> discussed this with Brian or Ralph, and could you or either of
>> them let us know?)
>> 
>> Note, I am not taking position for or against MLE at all - I
>> just want to ensure that a specification published be scoped so
>> as to not be constraining for domains for which it hasn't been
>> discussed.
>> 
>> Thomas