Re: [dtn] dtn wg work items

Hi,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dtn [mailto:dtn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Marc Blanchet
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2015 4:52 AM
> To: Martin Stiemerling
> Cc: dtn@ietf.org; dtn-chairs@tools.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [dtn] dtn wg work items
> 
> 
> > Le 2015-01-08 à 04:02, Martin Stiemerling <mls.ietf@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Sorry for the delay in replying.
> >
> > I am in principle ok with the work items of phase 1.
> 
> good.
> 
> >
> > However, the charter says (with good intention):
> > "Agree to a list of use cases for evolving the DTN specifications and a list of work items to be worked on."
> >
> > The list of work items is the second step IMHO, as the WG has to agree on a list of use cases that are considered in the first phase,
> before we can really agree on the list of work items.
> >
> > I assume that the below phase 1 list is based on use cases,
> 
> use cases have been part of the discussions but were not fully documented.
> 
> > but I would like to see the description of the use cases, either as an email to the list or in a draft. We do not take these drafts as WG
> items, but can have them as record of documentation in the progress of the WG.
> 
> Let’s see if we can find editors for use cases. I would like to just say that while it is good to have a perfect use-case -> work items ->
> document process (and I always agreed in principle on this, and the bof agenda was constructed that way), we may end up loosing
> energy in the working group, if we are way too picky. So a good balance here is needed.

I agree with Marc, and can volunteer to work on a use case document. Individual Submission?

Thanks - Fred
fred.l.templin@boeing.com

> > With respect to phase 2: I don't see that the WG can successfully talk right now about phase 2 at this point of time, as the work items
> list in phase 1 is already exhaustive and I assume that the work in phase 1 will result in a different phase 2 list.
> 
> that was the intent. the list of « phase 2 » is essentially a placeholder for topics that we talked about but were not getting concensus
> to work on initially. So we will discuss these later.
> 
> Marc.
> 
> >
> > A happy new year!
> >
> >  Martin
> >
> >
> > Am 17.12.14 um 20:34 schrieb Marc Blanchet:
> >> Martin, as AD for dtn wg,
> >>  here is the agreement of work items that the working group have concensus on. We are looking to get your approval so we can
> move forward on the technical work.
> >>
> >> Regards, Marc&Brian
> >>
> >> ===============
> >> DTN Work Items
> >>
> >> Phase 1
> >>
> >> 1 Integrity and Immutability
> >>  ◦ Status: DTN WG work item
> >>  ◦ Considerations:
> >>    a header integrity
> >>    b payload integrity
> >>    c e2e integrity
> >>    d immutability of primary block
> >>    e remove dictionary
> >>    f bundle size
> >> 2 Improved Security
> >>  ◦ Status: DTN WG work item
> >>  ◦ Considerations:
> >>    a Determine if SBSP is starting point
> >>    b Identify dependency on header changes
> >> 3 Addressing
> >>  ◦ Status: DTN WG work item
> >>  ◦ Considerations:
> >>    a develop requirements on addressing from use cases
> >>    b narrow scope of work
> >>    c Possible interim meeting
> >> 4 Node/Neighbor Discovery
> >>  ◦ Status: DTN WG work item
> >>  ◦ Considerations:
> >>    a Investigate MANET discovery protocol model
> >>    b Assess applicability of draft-irtf-dtnrg-ipnd
> >> 5 Static Routing
> >>  ◦ Status: DTN WG work item
> >>  ◦ Considerations:
> >>    a Assess relationship to node/neighbor discovery
> >> 6 Avoid Routing Loops
> >>  ◦ Status: DTN WG work item
> >>  ◦ Considerations:
> >>    a assess applicability of draft-fall-dtnrg-schl-00
> >> 7 Time and bundle expiration
> >>  ◦ Status: DTN WG work item
> >>  ◦ Considerations:
> >>    a assess applicability of draft-irtf-dtnrg-bundle-age-block-01
> >> 8 Improve Specifications such as RFC 5050
> >>  ◦ Status: DTN WG work item
> >>  ◦ Considerations:
> >>    a fix known specification bugs
> >>    b constrained environments
> >>    c default operations
> >>    d simplify options
> >>    e identify issues for incompatibilities with 5050
> >> 9 Registry of Service Identifier
> >>  ◦ Status: DTN WG work item.
> >>
> >> =======
> >> Phase 2
> >> (after phase 1 completed, potential work items below. list to be reviewed at that time)
> >> 1 Network Management
> >>  ◦ Network monitoring only, not configuration
> >>  ◦ Considerations:
> >>    a Potentially interface with LIME WG
> >>    b Move configuration to DTNRG?
> >> 2 Key management
> >> 3 Extended Class of Service
> >> 4 Multicast
> >> 5 Streaming Support
> >>
> >> ========
> >> Non Work Items
> >> 1 Dynamic Routing
> >>  ◦ Status: suggesting DTNRG
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dtn mailing list
> dtn@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn