Re: A personal take on WG's priorities..

["EricLKlein" <ericlklein@softhome.net>]

If this seems to be a viable and accepted option, (and I realize 2 dozen
messages is not a mandate) lets look at splitting into sub teams (WGs) along
the lines of 1 / 2  and 3 / 4 so we can start closing things out for
standard status.

Eric

> On Thu, 4 Nov 2004, Alain Durand wrote:
> > Essentially, there is work needed in 4 areas:
> >
> > 1. Tunneling
> > - finish the work on assisted tunneling, zeroconf tunneling, 3GPP
tunneling
> > requirements
> > - finish the analysis of existing protocol candidates
> > - design new one(s) if needed
> > - finish the work on tunnel end-point discovery
> >
> > 2. Protocol maintenance
> > - deprecate useless mechanism
> > - clarify/refine some mechanism (e.g. 6to4)
> > - move some mechanisms along standard track
> >
> > 3. Operational issues
> > - renumbering doc
> > - IPv6 on by default
> > - operational security docs
> > - result from operational experience
> >
> > 4.  Finish the work on scenario.
> >
> > A natural evolution of NGtrans/v6ops would be to shut down v6Ops
> > by declaring victory on (4), and create two new working group,
> > a short to medium term one, focusing on (1) & (2), and a long  term one
> > focusing on 3.
>
> Pekka responded:
>
> 1 and 2 are certainly separable pieces of this puzzle.  However, it is
> important to put in place good policies on which kind of new tunneling
> work would be accepted (would it e.g., require a rechartering) so that
> the "v6mechs" WG would not become a "swamp".
>
> 3 and 4 are something that could be doable by "trimmed-down" v6ops;
> I'd see no particular use in shutting down a WG and springing up a new
> one in its place.  (4) needs to be finished, and there might be useful
> work coming down at that pipe down the road (like the BB ISP
> document).  I don't think the WG would need to initiate actively new
> work on 4, but if there were solid proposals on better documentation
> of existing scenarios, I don't see why that could not be documented.
>
>