Re: [Roll] Adoption of draft-brandt-roll-home-routing-reqs as a ROLL WG document ?

RIght.

Thanks for the clarification.

   z

On May 15, 2008, at 3:46 PM, JP Vasseur wrote:

> Thanks for your reply.
>
> ps: that gives me the opportunity to clarify one thing though: by  
> all means, adopting a document as a WG document does not mean that  
> the document is ready for publication ! It just means that the WG  
> agrees to take it as the base document to address a WG item.
>
> Thanks.
>
> JP.
>
>
> On 5/15/08 6:22 PM, "Zachary Smith" <zsmith@daintree.net> wrote:
>
>> Yes,
>>
>> Although there is a point that probably bears discussion. In a  
>> multi-application network with sleeping end devices and resource- 
>> constrained routers, there is an end device management problem that  
>> is related to routing and might be considered as part of the  
>> routing solution. In short, it doesn't really make sense to rely on  
>> nearby routers to buffer arbitrary traffic for sleeping end  
>> devices. There are a number of possible solutions to this problem  
>> and not all of them involve the network layer but, if we are  
>> talking about "resource aware" routing then we might want to put in  
>> a requirement or two around this.
>>
>> My $0.02US,
>>
>>   z
>>
>> On May 15, 2008, at 1:41 PM, JP Vasseur wrote:
>>
>>> Dear WG,
>>>
>>>  Do you support the adoption of http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-brandt-roll-home-routing-reqs-01.txt 
>>>  as a ROLL WG document ?
>>>
>>>  Thanks.
>>>
>>>  JP.
>>>   _______________________________________________
>>> Roll mailing list
>>> Roll@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>>>
>>>
>>> Zachary Smith - CTO
>>> http://www.daintree.net/
>>> zsmith@daintree.net
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

Zachary Smith - CTO
http://www.daintree.net/
zsmith@daintree.net