successful termination?

[Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>]

Folks,

As you may have noticed, all three base Shim6 documents have now been 
approved after extensive edits from IESG reviews. This is obviously a 
very happy outcome even if it took a long time. Thank you everyone who 
was involved in making this happen!

Last week I when I met the chairs and lead authors I asked what they 
believe should happen next. A lively discussion followed about the 
status of the technology, the WG, and its few remaining WG documents. 
But our main conclusion was that the working group participants should 
tell us what they have in mind.

Here's a couple of different alternatives:

1. Declare success and close the WG. The most important work now is 
implementation, testing, and deployments. The WG is not needed at this 
moment, and if it will later be needed, it is easy to create a 
maintenance WG. Or if a new effort for some bigger new piece of 
functionality is needed, the proper way to do that is through a BOF 
anyway. Question: how many implementations exist? Which ones are worked 
on actively? Is there any deployment or trial experience to report?

2. Put the WG into sleep for a year or two, and return when there's 
additional experience.

3. Work on the most important one(s) of the remaining WG documents 
(locator-pair-selection, api, applicability). Which one? Is there energy 
to do the work, including WG participants doing reviews, commenting on 
issues, etc?

4. Do something else that is important for Shim6. What?

We would like to move forward with this in a couple of weeks. The WG 
will either be closed or rechartered. Let us know if you are interested 
and if so, what you believe should be done.

Jari