Please do not misunderstand my/our intentions. In reading the various
messages about the rechartering, it did not appear to us as though the
use-case was a priority item - not that it was not useful or would not
be useful, just not a priority. That was the only reason it was left
off of the charter. It was very clear that ND, Arch, and Security were
at the top of the list.
I am not at all against continuing with the use-case ID in parallel to
the rest of the documents. I think that it is and could be useful.
I will add it back to charter text, but please let me know a date that
we can plan to have the ID completed.
geoff
On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 19:50 +0200, JP Vasseur wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
>
> On 6/12/08 4:06 PM, "Mark Townsley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Geoff Mulligan wrote:
> >> It didn't seem to be a priority item.
> >>
> >> Perhaps we should consider incorporating the Use Cases into the
> >> architecture document.
> > Whether the use-cases are in the arch document or separate is somewhat
> > orthogonal to whether they are chartered work right now.
> >> If not then I think once we complete the few
> >> documents we should then revisit the use cases.
> >>
> > I a missing why writing down use-cases is not a good thing to do sooner
> > rather than later. I don't think it should stop protocol work in its
> > tracks, but I see no indication right now that it would. As long as the
> > use-cases are considered informational and can run largely in parallel*
> > to the normative work at this stage, I don't know why we wouldn't pursue it.
> >
> > - Mark
> >
> > *If this were the very beginnings of 6lowpan, I would insist on
> > use-cases to help drive requirements, architecture, and finally solution
> > design. While we are somewhat past that stage, I do think they could
> > still be very useful to ROLL, as well as going forward as we continue to
> > debate the pros and cons of various optimizations.
>
> Absolutely ! The only (but useful) objective is to document 6lowpan
> application, informational ID of course.
>
> Thanks.
>
> JP.
>
> >> geoff
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 10:49 +0900, Eunsook "Eunah" Kim wrote:
> >>
> >>> Geoff,
> >>>
> >>> 6LoWPAN use-case was always in the recharter items, and there was no
> >>> objection on it. Any reason to take it out?
> >>> Thanks for the good work.
> >>>
> >>> -eunah
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 4:02 AM, Geoff Mulligan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> After reviewing the comments on the list and talking with Carsten and
> >>>> Mark, we have come up with the following text for the Charter.
> >>>>
> >>>> We hope (and think) that this reflects the input from the group and Mark
> >>>> plans to take this to the IESG for rechartering approval.
> >>>>
> >>>> We've had some excellent discussion on a few topics and this is great.
> >>>> There is no reason why we should stop the discussion and work while Mark
> >>>> handles the rechartering.
> >>>>
> >>>> 1. I think that the work is proceeding on the Security Analysis document
> >>>> 2. We have the current HC1G draft. The issue being discussed is the
> >>>> "compression" of the UDP checksum and it's impact on the end-to-end
> >>>> model. I would like to hear more input and discussion on this. Please
> >>>> speak up if you have thoughts on this.
> >>>> 3. We have some initial input on the Architecture document and I would
> >>>> like to hear from anyone that would volunteer to continue to work on
> >>>> this document.
> >>>>
> >>>> geoff
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> 6lowpan mailing list
> >>>> [email protected]
> >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 6lowpan mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
> >>
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 6lowpan mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
