RE: red draft-iporpr-core-00.txt

I think the main contribution of the current draft is 
with respect to specifying that we let ringlet selection 
be done by the MAC.  The rest is tutorial information.

I think it would make sense to have the draft
specify how one should pass all the parameters
across the 802.17 service interface for the various
types of IP packets (unicast, multicast, broadcast)
and ARP with MUSTs for things like leaving the ringletID
unspecified.  That's probably all that's needed until
we decide to start specifying how to take advantage 
of 802.17's advanced features.

-Anoop

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Kastenholz [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 10:54 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [IPORPR] red draft-iporpr-core-00.txt
> 
> 
> 
> Folks, 
> 
> I have to go off and do some day-job work for a week or
> two so can not devote a lot of time to discussing the
> draft right now. But please read, review, comment, and
> debate the draft, etc. I'll catch up in a week or two.
> 
> 
> 
> To remind people, our next milestones are
> 1. we should produce the next rev of the draft in February
>    2003. I've personally always intended for this item to 
>    be a "make sure we've had comments and revisions done by
>    then" -- we can have more revisions. We are well on our 
>    way to doing this work.
> 2. We're also supposed to produce a revised version of the
>    framework draft, folding into that draft the things we've
>    discovered/invented/etc-ed from doing the core draft.
>    This draft is due in February 2003 also.
>    A couple of people have started working on this. Unless
>    we hit some snags I am confident that we're well on track
>    for getting this work done.
> 
> Frank Kastenholz
> co-chair, IPoRPR
> _______________________________________________
> IPORPR mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iporpr
>