Joe,
If the purpose of the WG is to document the protocols currently in
experimental use in a group in the IETF, no BOF is needed and they seem
ready to proceed.
If the purpose of the WG is experiments, then this work clearly belongs
back on the IRTF, which is not the goal AFAICT (I bring this up only to
reinforce David's view that experiments are out of scope).
I like to think about this the other way around. Where are we now, where
do we want be in two years, and how do we get there? If we create a new
group, the group should have plan to do the work that is needed to move
the state of the art forward. If the plan requires experiments, so be
it. We can of course talk about whether this effort should be in IETF or
IRTF, but in any case the charter of a new group should be based on what
steps are needed, not on what steps are allowed.
I think it is clear that there are several hard questions in this space,
and we simply do not know whether, e.g., some of the mapping ideas
actually work well in real life. My belief is that finding out requires
not just implementation, but also well planned trials, experiments,
simulation, or measurements. Otherwise its too easy to focus on
relatively minor protocol details and miss the big picture.
Jari
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
