adopt the hain/templin draft as an IPv6 wg item *so that we can revise the
document based on input from the wg as we work toward a finished product*.
There is no expectation that the document in its current form is ready for wg
last-call - indeed, we anticipate one or more revision update(s) beyond the
current. IMO, wg involvement is needed to help facilitate this process.
In particular, the document focus should be on Requirements (or, as Brian
perhaps more appropriately terms them, "Goals") and Scenarios; not solutions.
Guidance from the wg is needed to help identify aspects of the current draft
version that don't fit in well with that focus. Again, IMO, this process is best
supported by adopting the hain/templin draft as a wg item, i.e., so we
can *work* on it!
Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Eliot Lear wrote:
Fred,
Fred Templin wrote:
Folks - do we have consensus to accept this document as an IPv6 wg item (see below)?
I'll admit to some process fuzziness here, so I'm not quite sure what's being asked. If we are being asked that we agree with the content of the document, I'd have to say on the whole at least: not yet. If you want a requirements draft, write requirements and don't wander into the solution space. If you want a solutions draft, that's okay too. Just don't call it a requirements document.
Eliot
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
