Quick question at this stage, several years back, v6ops formed several internal-groups to develop IPv6 transition scenario, and the unmanaged network (it meant home network) was published as RFC 3904. Are there any relationship between this draft and that RFC efforts or reference points ?
I will be also trying to come up with more specific comments soon. Daniel -- Soohong Daniel Park Samsung Electronics, DMC R&D http://www.soohongp.com, twitter:@natpt On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Tim Chown <t...@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: > > On 19 Sep 2011, at 22:01, Mark Townsley wrote: > > > > Procedurally, the WG can do what it wants to here, there is no official > method for declaring a document a WG document. Different WGs operate in very > different manners in this regard. > > > > What I am suggesting here is that a draft should be published any moment > now (Tim?), and that I want people to read it and let us know if it is an OK > start for a work in progress for the WG to actively try to finish. If there > are no other competing architecture documents to evaluate, I'd like to see > it move towards being a WG document rather quickly (we're supposed to be > finished by December). This by no means says the document is finished or > even has consensus of the WG in its current state, just that it is the > document the WG will try and turn into a final product. All this means is > that it becomes the "working group's document" rather than "Tim, Jari, Jason > and Ole's document". > > > Sounds fine. > > Now that the update is out, I would just say that so long as the WG knows > this is "the homenet architecture draft", it's status is not that important, > except that the charter target was WG adoption by the end of this month, and > we shouldn't treat those targets too lightly. > > From the perspective of the interim meeting, I believe the agenda of that > meeting includes slots for each of the five requirements (routing, naming, > security, etc) so we should be agreeing as much as we can at the very least > on the general principles we will follow for those slots, if not the > architecture in full. > > Tim > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > homenet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet >
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
