[homenet] liasons and cross posting (was Re: Question for you)

2011-10-06 Thread Curtis Villamizar

In message <96082b87-d6f6-4dcf-aea6-789c99d5a...@cisco.com>
Fred Baker writes:
 
> Not sure that's the same thing. WiFi is an industry organization, not
> an SDO. Yes, we could send them a letter.

IEEE would be the relevant standards organization, if we had any
relevant input into what is done at layer-2.  IEEE usually sticks to
layer-2 and IETF to layer-3 and up (layer-2.5 if that is what you want
to call MPLS).

We would contact WiFi if we had as idea for logo artwork for an IETF
homenet/manet/roll/rtgwg blessed profile.  This is not typically what
IETF does.

IMHO - neither is a good candidate for a liason relationship.

btw - this message is cross posted to three lists: homenet, manet,
rtgwg.  I suggest we drop the cc to homenet only and anyone on rtgwg
and manet can join homenet and continue the discussion.

In Fred's defense, when he started this thread he asked that responses
be sent to him only and not to the lists.

[I'm not subscribed to manet, so this email may not get there.]

Curtis


> On Oct 5, 2011, at 11:24 AM, Joe Touch wrote:
>  
> > -1
> > 
> > The charter already allows for interface to external groups:
> > 
> > ---
> > The working group will also liason with external
> > standards bodies where it is expected that there are normative
> > dependencies between the specifications of the two bodies.
> > ---
> > 
> > I.e., this can be handled via liaisons (better, IMO).
> > 
> > Joe
> > 
> > 
> > On Oct 1, 2011, at 5:20 PM, Fred Baker wrote:
> >> 
> >> On Oct 1, 2011, at 10:38 PM, Don Sturek wrote:
> >> 
> >>> To add one more point to Fred's note:  I think it is important to get a
> >>> commercial group like Wi-Fi to participate in Homenet, adopt some or all
> >>> of the drafts/RFCs then sponsor interoperability testing.
> >> 
> >> That would be very interesting.
___
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet


Re: [homenet] liasons and cross posting (was Re: Question for you)

2011-10-06 Thread Ulrich Herberg
Hi Curtis,

Sorry for my off-topic email:

On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 11:40 AM, Curtis Villamizar  wrote:

> [...]
> btw - this message is cross posted to three lists: homenet, manet,
> rtgwg.  I suggest we drop the cc to homenet only and anyone on rtgwg
> and manet can join homenet and continue the discussion.
>

Actually, I would prefer to limit it to one mailing list (e.g. homenet). As
many, like you, are not subscribed to MANET, the MANET chairs or I have to
accept each reply manually because of the mailing list filters (and
currently, there are several emails per day). I have sent an email to the
MANET list that the thread is continued on homenet only, so everyone
interested in the topic may follow the thread there.

Best regards
Ulrich


>
> > On Oct 5, 2011, at 11:24 AM, Joe Touch wrote:
> >
> > > -1
> > >
> > > The charter already allows for interface to external groups:
> > >
> > > ---
> > > The working group will also liason with external
> > > standards bodies where it is expected that there are normative
> > > dependencies between the specifications of the two bodies.
> > > ---
> > >
> > > I.e., this can be handled via liaisons (better, IMO).
> > >
> > > Joe
> > >
> > >
> > > On Oct 1, 2011, at 5:20 PM, Fred Baker wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Oct 1, 2011, at 10:38 PM, Don Sturek wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> To add one more point to Fred's note:  I think it is important to get
> a
> > >>> commercial group like Wi-Fi to participate in Homenet, adopt some or
> all
> > >>> of the drafts/RFCs then sponsor interoperability testing.
> > >>
> > >> That would be very interesting.
> ___
> 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


Re: [homenet] liasons and cross posting (was Re: Question for you)

2011-10-06 Thread Stephen [kiwin] Palm
Wi-Fi Alliance (WFA) is also a standards setting organization in addition to 
its marketing role. Relevent work should be liaised to WFA. 
I can help arrange a liaision application. 

Regards, kiwin
---
Stephen [kiwin] Palm   Ph.D. W: http://www.kiwin.com
Senior Technical Director T: +1-949-926-PALM
   Broadcom - Broadband Communications Group 


- Original Message -
From: Curtis Villamizar [mailto:cur...@occnc.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 11:40 AM
To: Fred Baker 
Cc: Don Sturek ; Joe Touch ; C Chauvenet 
; MANET IETF ; Mark Townsley 
; Acee Lindem ; homenet@ietf.org 
; rt...@ietf.org 
Subject: [homenet] liasons and cross posting (was Re: Question for you)


In message <96082b87-d6f6-4dcf-aea6-789c99d5a...@cisco.com>
Fred Baker writes:
 
> Not sure that's the same thing. WiFi is an industry organization, not
> an SDO. Yes, we could send them a letter.

IEEE would be the relevant standards organization, if we had any
relevant input into what is done at layer-2.  IEEE usually sticks to
layer-2 and IETF to layer-3 and up (layer-2.5 if that is what you want
to call MPLS).

We would contact WiFi if we had as idea for logo artwork for an IETF
homenet/manet/roll/rtgwg blessed profile.  This is not typically what
IETF does.

IMHO - neither is a good candidate for a liason relationship.

btw - this message is cross posted to three lists: homenet, manet,
rtgwg.  I suggest we drop the cc to homenet only and anyone on rtgwg
and manet can join homenet and continue the discussion.

In Fred's defense, when he started this thread he asked that responses
be sent to him only and not to the lists.

[I'm not subscribed to manet, so this email may not get there.]

Curtis


> On Oct 5, 2011, at 11:24 AM, Joe Touch wrote:
>  
> > -1
> > 
> > The charter already allows for interface to external groups:
> > 
> > ---
> > The working group will also liason with external
> > standards bodies where it is expected that there are normative
> > dependencies between the specifications of the two bodies.
> > ---
> > 
> > I.e., this can be handled via liaisons (better, IMO).
> > 
> > Joe
> > 
> > 
> > On Oct 1, 2011, at 5:20 PM, Fred Baker wrote:
> >> 
> >> On Oct 1, 2011, at 10:38 PM, Don Sturek wrote:
> >> 
> >>> To add one more point to Fred's note:  I think it is important to get a
> >>> commercial group like Wi-Fi to participate in Homenet, adopt some or all
> >>> of the drafts/RFCs then sponsor interoperability testing.
> >> 
> >> That would be very interesting.
___
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