Re: [Autoconf] On WG progress and draft-ietf-autoconf-adhoc-addr-model

Hi,

This is Hyung-Jin Lim.
I am still reading AUTOCONF mailing lists.

I also agree to Teco's suggestion totally.
Thanks.
2009/10/23 Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>

> Teco Boot a écrit :
>
> Hi Ryuji, Thomas,
>>
>> o       if you think that the WG should proceed with
>>>
>> draft-ietf-autoconf-adhoc-addr-model
>>
>>>        as a baseline, say so!
>>>
>>
>> I am neutral on this.
>>
>> I think my comments on earlier versions are not well incorporated and the
>> document misses essential elements for a practical addressing scheme for
>> MANETs, such as global addresses and usage of ULAs. I think the recently
>> published "bernardos alternative" is more complete and also better specifies
>> LL usage.
>> I prefer not extending useless discussions on LLs, but careful wording for
>> it.
>>
>>
>> o       if you think there're cardinal (but fixable) issues missing or
>>> wrong
>>>
>> with
>>
>>>        draft-ietf-autoconf-adhoc-addr-model, then let the WG know what
>>>
>> these
>>
>>>        issues are, and propose a solution before the deadline. The
>>> Editors        will certainly do their best to address the issues.
>>>
>>
>> I posted this already.
>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/autoconf/current/msg01828.html
>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/autoconf/current/msg01830.html
>> I do not understand why text is not corrected yet.
>>
>>
>> o       if you think that draft-ietf-autoconf-adhoc-addr-model is beyond
>>>
>> hope,
>>
>>>        let the WG know explicitly how you suggest that we progress  at
>>> this
>>>
>> point --
>>
>>>        considering the current timeline!!
>>>
>>
>> After 3 months, we have a new version with only small updates
>> (enhancements
>> or wrong text, make your choice). I think this progress is extremely
>> disappointing. Or "beyond hope".
>>
>>
>> A question on procedure: can we decide to swap the content of
>> draft-ietf-autoconf-adhoc-addr-model, e.g. a new version with content of
>> draft-bernardos-autoconf-addressing-model or a merger of those?
>>
>
> This is something I tend to agree to.  I am suggesting the same thing: copy
> relevant things from draft-bernardos and paste on the WG item document.
>
> Of course, it depends how this is done, but it is a good direction IMHO.
>
> Alex
>
>
>
>>
>> Anyway, we have more progress than listed on the Autoconf page: we have
>> completed our fourth goal: there is a initial draft on addressing model in
>> ad hoc networks. And we might not be that far away from our last
>> milestone.
>>
>> Regards, Teco
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Autoconf mailing list
>> Autoconf@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Autoconf mailing list
> Autoconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
>