IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] Moving forward with the protocol work

Jonathan Hui <jhui@archrock.com> Fri, 31 July 2009 17:25 UTC

Return-Path: <jhui@archrock.com>
X-Original-To: roll@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D12823A6D72 for <roll@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 10:25:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.274
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.274 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.325, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id duU6lCMB7jxN for <roll@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 10:25:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sf.archrock.com (mail.sf.archrock.com [216.121.16.71]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B08C3A6CDE for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 10:25:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sf.archrock.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C1A3AF91E; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 10:25:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
Received: from mail.sf.archrock.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sf.archrock.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U-CKvxgnxKwa; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 10:25:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.200] (adsl-71-142-86-50.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [71.142.86.50]) by mail.sf.archrock.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CED3AF865; Fri, 31 Jul 2009 10:25:48 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <F0FD0B6C-EC60-4F29-956E-7B68FFBF8218@archrock.com>
From: Jonathan Hui <jhui@archrock.com>
To: Pascal Thubert <pthubert@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <7892795E1A87F04CADFCCF41FADD00FC07DC2944@xmb-ams-337.emea.cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3)
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 10:25:48 -0700
References: <A196A9AC-3E79-4134-B2C0-C866E1BFDD59@cisco.com> <7892795E1A87F04CADFCCF41FADD00FC07DC2944@xmb-ams-337.emea.cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3)
Cc: ROLL WG <roll@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Moving forward with the protocol work
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 17:25:51 -0000

+1.

The working group needs something to work with if we want to make  
forward progress...

--
Jonathan Hui

On Jul 29, 2009, at 6:37 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote:

> +1.
>
> There are certainly a number of issues on this draft, but they only  
> can
> be solved properly by the WG if the doc belongs to the WG in the first
> place.
>
> I've sensed a degree of frustration from people outside the design  
> team
> and it's time to open the door for comments and improvements  
> originated
> from the WG.
>
> It's also time to use the formal process to track issues and get WG
> consensus on how to deal with them. So I think it's fair to transfer
> ownership to the WG and apply the appropriate processes to fix what  
> need
> fixing, add what must be added etc...
>
> Pascal
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: roll-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:roll-bounces@ietf.org] On  
>> Behalf Of
> JP Vasseur (jvasseur)
>> Sent: mardi 28 juillet 2009 18:34
>> To: ROLL WG
>> Subject: [Roll] Moving forward with the protocol work
>>
>> Dear WG,
>>
>> First of all, thanks for all the time and energy you all have devoted
>> during the past few weeks on the protocol work. There was excellent
>> followup discussion at the physical WG meeting.
>>
>> To the question "Do you think that RPL provides an adequate  
>> foundation
>> for the ROLL routing protocol work", there was clearly a good
>> consensus in the WG meeting. It was also recognized there are still
>> several open issues for which we WILL need help from many WG
>> contributors, including the authors of other documents.
>>
>> Could you please confirm (or not) the adoption of draft-dt-roll- 
>> rpl-01
>> as a WG document ?
>>
>> Then we will of course move to the next step.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> JP and David
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Roll mailing list
>> Roll@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email