Subject: Re: [Autoconf] closing the working group?

From: Emmanuel Baccelli <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 12:17:44 +0200

Hi Jari,

thanks for the help on RFC5889, it was tough, but at least we finally got
somewhere.
If my help is deemed useful for some document to come in this realm, let me
know. I'll be glad contribute.

A side note: if we are to close the working group, do you think it would be
useful for the record to publish
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-baccelli-multi-hop-wireless-communication-05?

After all, this document was extensively discussed, there was a rough
consensus in the
the WG about it, and its content may be useful to designers and implementers
down the line.
Any thoughts about this?

Regards,

Emmanuel

On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 8:48 AM, Jari Arkko <[email-masked]> wrote:

> I have looked at the discussions on the list (or lack thereof). I also
> cannot see too many internet drafts on the topics belonging to the group's
> charter. I am very happy with the RFC that has been produced by the working
> group, but we also seem to have some actual protocol work happening
> elsewhere (e.g., in the context of the ROLL WG).
>
> I discussed this matter with the chairs and my co-AD, and we are wondering
> if it would be time to close the working group. I do know that there is at
> least one implementation team that is still in the process of describing
> their DHCP-based solution, maybe there are similar efforts on the
> distributed solution space. My proposal is that we close the working group
> and I'be VERY happy to AD sponsor all such solutions to Experimental RFCs as
> soon as we have those proposals in some reasonable shape.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Jari
>
> _______________________________________________
> Autoconf mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
>