Hello folks,
I vote for WGLC by Wednesday. I am available to work on it full time.
Going for Experimental is a terrible step backwards. We've already gone
Experimental.
We have done a helluva lot of work on the protocol, resolving issues
that in almost every other circumstance would have been left to the
implementation.
This is a very good specification, except for the mistake of multicast
RREP. But that mistake pales in significance compared to the mistake of
not getting RFC publication.
Regards,
Charlie P.
On 4/18/2016 5:49 PM, Stan Ratliff wrote:
Hello AODVv2 authors/editors:
OK, I can finally give some more details about the future of the draft. Long story short:
1. Alvaro has given Justin and i a 6-week window to re-charter the WG, or he's going to shut it down.
2. His current thinking is that we (the chairs) CANNOT proceed with the re-charter unless/until AODVv2 is "disposed of". Disposed of means one of (a) rejecting the doc, releasing it to the authors to pursue as an AD-sponsored draft if they so desire. (b) Making the draft Experimental instead of standards track, which lowers the bar, and issuing WGLC in that mode,or (c) a *SUCCESSFUL* WGLC on Standards Track.
3. I've been in discussion with Justin. His current thinking is that we should WGLC the doc, no later than 4/20 (Wednesday). It's something of an open question whether to WGLC the doc as Standards Track, or Experimental.
4. There's another open question as to whether Alvaro will allow us to start re-charter work while the WGLC is in progress. If his response is "no", *IT WILL CHANGE THE CALCULUS*. The calculus *WILL* head towards releasing the document - at this point, it's either AODVv2, or the whole MANET WG.
5. If the WGLC is called, there will be specific criteria coming out of the WGLC, which will determine the fate of the doc. If there is a "no consensus" coming out of WGLC, I'd expect the document to be released back to the authors.
I need your inputs on the notion of making the draft Experimental. It may well save all of the work - as Justin stated, the "experiment" would be to "get the protocol out into the public domain, to see if there is a significant desire to adopt, and maybe to standardize in the future."
But at any rate - I've been saying for quite a while that "we're running out of runway". That time has arrived. There are no more extensions, no more "just one more IETF". In some form or fashion, this has been going on for 10 years. It ends now, or the WG ends.
I need your thoughts, and I need them quickly. We should also be prepared to post the document no later than 1200 Wednesday, to start a WGLC.
Regards,
Stan
