IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [6tisch] FW: Agenda for the 6TiSCH interim April 24th

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Thu, 23 April 2015 14:59 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: 6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EB311AC425 for <6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Apr 2015 07:59:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.911
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CH4HeGEF9L9H for <6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Apr 2015 07:59:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AF9F1AC435 for <6tisch@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Apr 2015 07:59:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id B689FE1B1 for <6tisch@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Apr 2015 11:11:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id CCDA163B86; Thu, 23 Apr 2015 10:59:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3CAB63784 for <6tisch@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Apr 2015 10:59:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "6tisch\@ietf.org" <6tisch@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD849E07EA8@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
References: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD849DD6262@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com> <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD849E07EA8@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.3-dev; GNU Emacs 24.4.2
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 10:59:34 -0400
Message-ID: <19123.1429801174@sandelman.ca>
Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6tisch/QPmKUnRRvvthYvJIkxWwl3fF8HM>
Subject: Re: [6tisch] FW: Agenda for the 6TiSCH interim April 24th
X-BeenThere: 6tisch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discuss link layer model for Deterministic IPv6 over the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4e, and impacts on RPL and 6LoWPAN such as resource allocation" <6tisch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6tisch>, <mailto:6tisch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6tisch/>
List-Post: <mailto:6tisch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6tisch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch>, <mailto:6tisch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 14:59:40 -0000

Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com> wrote:
    > Sorry for insisting but I want to make sure that you all are aware of
    > the agenda for the interim call tomorrow; in particular: - We want to
    > check readiness for the architecture and the minimal drafts to go to
    > IESG. If you provided comments to the last call, we'd really appreciate
    > that you attend to call.

I will be 30 minutes late due to a conflict.
I think that all my issues are closed.

    > - we want to conclude on whether we can
    > remove the 'e' in the charter (and/or the documents that we produce!)
    > . If you have a strong opinion, please attend.

I don't have a strong opinion, and I feel that some of the layer-9
(political) layer issues are beyond me.  What I heard suggests that there are
actual technical things that might force us to retain the earlier year
reference, and that there are technical reasons to want to remove the "e",
and the year reference.

It seems therefore that the right thing is to leave the "e" in place for
this "volume" of the architecture, to let the IEEE publish the -2015
document, and then consider whether we can/should reference 802.15.4-2015,
or 802.15.4(-noyear) for volume 2.

Perhaps it is enough to say, "we believe that the 6tisch requirements are
consistent with the not-yet-published 802.15.4-2015 document"


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email