Administrivia [was Re: irtf-rr & active network (Olivier Marce)]

From: Sean Doran (smd@ebone.net)
Date: Wed Dec 13 2000 - 20:16:33 EST


| I not attend the IETF meeting then I would not able to discuss this point
| with you, but I wonder if the active network topic is considered by the WG ?

The IRTF and the IETF are different organizations and run under
different rules. See http://www.irtf.org/

This (irtf-rr@puck.nether.net) is the *OPEN* mailing list of our RG,
analogous to the end2end-interest list of our sibling RG, End2End.
It's open in the sense that it is not restricted exlusively to RG
members and persons otherwise nominated by the co-chairs of the Routing RG.

BCP 8 requires regular progress reporting to the community by
closed RGs, and you can expect that from Abha and me.

At the moment we are working on very primitive issues: what we should
tackle first, and who should be involved, so there isn't a huge
amount to report.

Although the RG's work and meetings will be closed for now on
what we have agreed will be our initial project, the open
list may prove useful for routing-research related conversations,
or for suggesting future or parallel study, whether this is to
be undertaken by the RG as it stands now, some future version of
the RG, or some other RG entirely.

Moreover, we are open to suggestions of open meetings from time
to time. As with the first open meeting, having it at the same
time as the IETF meetings simplifies some things, however, this
does not meen that there will be an open meeting at every IETF.

As Abha noted, if there is sufficient good discussion on the open
list, and people in general believe there is some value in having
an open meeting, then we will schedule one somewhere reasonably convenient.

As there has been nearly no discussion on the open list prior to
this IETF, there will be no RG open meeting this week.

| I guess that there is some applications on the active network to the routing
| which are very interesting and that raises a lot of issues.
| Should not this yet prospective domain considered in the WG ?

By all means, feel free to start a discussion on this open list.

        Sean.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 04 2003 - 04:10:04 EDT