2/ establish a long-term area: decide that the SUB-IP
area will be a long-term one, clearly define its charter, and ask the
nomcom to select one or two people to be Area Directors
I spoke on this at the Sub-IP area meeting. I beleive that the Area
provides focus for a class of problem that is not going to go away. In
fact, as the versions of IP are adapted to more underlying structures,
including the optical sub-strucutre today and wireless sub-structures
tomorrow, there will alwasy be a class of problem that is best
categorized as the sub-ip problem. In fact throughout the history of
the IETF there have been such issues, e.g. PPP, it is just that they
were easily hosted in other areas due to their relative simplicity. As
this class of issue grows, however, I think it would benefit from the
focus only obtainable its own area. It may even be reasonable to go
through the working groups in some other areas and see if some don't fit
better into a generic sub-IP area.
One further point:
Should the WGs be parcelled out to various groups, GSMP should be
considered as a candidate for the O&M area. Though GSMP was originally
in the Routing area this was becasue the MPLS area was there. As it is
a management protocol for sub-ip entities I think the best alternate
placement for it is the management area. I obviously support it
remaining in the permanent Sub-IP area should that be an option.
a.
--
Avri Doria
http://www.sm.luth.se/~avri/