[homenet] Homenet Design Team for Routing Protocol Selection

Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> Wed, 08 April 2015 13:33 UTC

Return-Path: <akatlas@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0A271A86F0; Wed, 8 Apr 2015 06:33:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 qlYY6yA5JmJl; Wed, 8 Apr 2015 06:33:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ob0-x22c.google.com (mail-ob0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE8AC1A86E9; Wed, 8 Apr 2015 06:33:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by obbeb7 with SMTP id eb7so63105065obb.3; Wed, 08 Apr 2015 06:33:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=pLRe94BtDstXH0D5AyyBIr5IqltgkzBURO3JcpDFXXM=; b=Mge2lwypgi3U6bVDcH3vuYqcl+sWDHxZz0KpV10DyyGtzEucgLTFLktR0QzfScoIVA ZJnLPDh7qshDJuOypuuA7kUvYmOnbNj6KixEjzkSwZVtBlXeFZrTHhH4wDyaUFFrJ6rD rMNoJQkB/Fd9mjYApAhyhuTijNeGDgOJNsgiRiURMvDNRChzuiA5hCBjdH4X/cXNrPTV SGpYEBjXP64ivFp7533AFffPTP69AJfmGQJbGj+CTz5oNjFOi39FddzNtIDz58858Tes A3XVlY4Y5Zlml+Z9+Drxo8yZPgsNeXmKFaGPf8O58otVyFouXHcVKpAT7Pdoz3IOkDYW F3Cw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.91.5 with SMTP id ca5mr31251921obb.54.1428499987296; Wed, 08 Apr 2015 06:33:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.60.44.198 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Apr 2015 06:33:07 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2015 09:33:07 -0400
Message-ID: <CAG4d1rfwHtKqjDc7q3rXbkx=HOgXUTBeO8jmxgtTk0CdWfS+wg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
To: HOMENET <homenet@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="e89a8fb1ee244df8240513369244"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/c0sX3g0mFcu7Mtj43eC7PD6fkBA>
Cc: "int-ads@ietf.org" <int-ads@ietf.org>
Subject: [homenet] Homenet Design Team for Routing Protocol Selection
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2015 13:33:19 -0000

Terry's email on April 6 confirmed that Homenet will use the approach
of having a Design Team to select the one mandatory-to-implement
routing protocol.   The charter for the design team, as sent in his email,
is below.

I am happy to also announce the membership of the design team with
many thanks to them for taking on this time-consuming and critical job.

Russ White (lead)
Margaret (Wasserman) Cullen
Ralph Droms
Philippe Klein
Wes George
Ross Callon

The design team has a private mailing list homenet-dt-routing@ietf.org
for their internal communication.   The design team members are the
only ones on that mailing list.

Charter:

"Homenet's architecture (RFC 7368) articulates the general features
required.  The working group has agreed that a single routing protocol
must be identified as mandatory to implement.  The final purpose of
this design team is to select and present a single routing protocol
with a summary of the necessary extensions and work to be the one that
is mandatory to implement.  Once the design team has made its
recommendation, the working group will consider any substantial
technical objections (see RFC 7282) as part of gaining consensus.

For the design team to make this determination, it shall first
understand the use-cases for homenet and derive routing requirements
from those.  Then it shall compare these routing requirements to
candidate routing protocols and examine the gaps in each.  For each
highly plausible candidate routing protocol, the design team will
estimate the work and actions needed, the resources at hand
or reasonably available, and the associated timeline to get
an acceptable, full, standardized solution using each protocol.
Based upon this information and the perceived market timing
needs of the technology, the design team will make its selection.
The requirements, gaps, and reasoning will be documented.

This document should be delivered by the July 2015 IETF."

Regards,
Alia