Re: [Roll] RPL Status

[Alexandru Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 21/05/2010 14:37, JP Vasseur a écrit :
> Hi Alex,
>
> Few comments. Last calling the base specification does not imply by all
> means that the work is complete,

I would have expected to Last Call a document which we believe is almost 
done.

Alex

> we have other items in our charter, could be re-chartered according to
> the WG's feed-back, etc ...
> We were referring to the */base/* RPL specification and for that we have
> a ticket opened that helps
> us track that the base specification meets the requirements spelled out
> in the four requirements
> document. For the record, I'll resend the document, that will be updated
> after each revision of RPL.
> As pointed out by Phil, if we can move forward with P2P I-D that'd be great.
>
> Thanks.
>
> JP and David.
>
> On May 20, 2010, at 2:40 PM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
>
>> Le 19/05/2010 09:39, Anders Brandt a écrit :
>>> All,
>>> >the plan is still to Last Call RPL before the next IETF
>>> I would like to poll the WG on this statement.
>>> The home and building requirements are not met by the current RPL draft
>>> and we have not even started discussing the P2P ID mechanisms in detail -
>>> or frame format modifications for that matter.
>>> Does the WG agree that a RPL spec without support for home and building
>>> applications is acceptable?
>>
>> Only in part because of the failure to meet requirements - I disagree
>> to pursue RPL towards LC before the next IETF: it is way too early.
>>
>> We have wide technical misunderstandings about the scope of this
>> protocol and its applicability.
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Anders
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> *From:* [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] *On
>>> Behalf Of *JP Vasseur
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 18, 2010 11:48
>>> *To:* roll WG
>>> *Subject:* [Roll] RPL Status
>>>
>>> Dear WG,
>>>
>>> Here is a quick status. First, we would like to thank the WG again
>>> for the continuous effort and lots of fruitful and productive work !
>>> As discussed in Anaheim, the plan is still to Last Call RPL before
>>> the next IETF. The plan is to release the next revision of the RPL
>>> I-D by end of next week. Rev-08 will address the following:
>>>
>>> 1) Security section (integrating the work on the security DT)
>>> 2) New DAO mechanism (cleaner and more simple), as agreed on the
>>> Mailing List
>>> 3) Basic source routing => See also companion drafts to be published
>>> very soon for (RH-0 like)
>>> 4) Updated manageability section
>>> 5) DAO ACK
>>> 6) Trickle algorithm removed from the core specification (in a
>>> separate doc), Examples removed
>>> 7) Several Edits, clarifications, ...
>>>
>>> I had a discussion with David, and the plan is to have the P2P a
>>> separate ID (the current RPL specification provides basic P2P, with
>>> "advanced" P2P defined in that I-D), with the objective to progress
>>> both documents in parallel.
>>>
>>> */What else ?/*
>>> We need to progress a few other documents:
>>> 1) Use of the RPL TLV: see draft-hui-6man-rpl-option (6man WG)
>>> 2) Source routing header (RH-0 like): to be published soon
>>> (Jonathan/David)
>>> 3) RPL Variables (ticket #22)
>>> 4) ID related to measurement from P2P (if consensus on Mailing list)
>>>
>>> Looking forward to your comments as soon as rev-08 will be published.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> JP and David.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Roll mailing list
>>> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Roll mailing list
>> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>