Margaret Wasserman wrote:
Mobility is quite close to the core of the Internet area, with close
tie-ins to IP, addressing/address selection, multihoming, IP-in-IP
tunneling, etc. I would personally object to the idea of trying to
separate IP and Mobility into separate areas.
I agree with this. There's fairly large section of the INT area work that
relates to support for wireless nodes or support for movements, and
judging from BoFs there's demand for more. But this seems more like
an evolution of the IP layer protocol set than a separable issue.
(And I'm not saying this because I'd believe the areas should
somehow be cast in stone. The IETF needs to adjust when the
needs change. For instance, I believe its a great idea to create
the new real-time area, because it gives focus for the people
who work on that area, visibility, a clearer interface to and
from the IETF on these matters, etc. And as you suggested,
the number of ADs should reflect the needs. A large area
such as INT might deserve three at certain times, and perhaps its
not unthinkable that a small area needs just one... resources
need to be put where they are most needed. This may be
similar to David's point, in fact.)
--Jari
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf