Tony, A very quick question about your idea. Does this layer have a protocol / interface to other elements on the network? Or are you proposing something more like an abstract API? thanks, John > -----Original Message----- > From: ext Tony Hain [mailto:alh-ietf@tndh.net] > Sent: 26 August, 2003 21:12 > To: 'Robert Honore' > Cc: ietf@ietf.org; ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com > Subject: RE: Solving the right problems ... > > > Robert Honore wrote: > > Perhaps this proposal really requires another working group or > > something. > > To be clear, I was not recommending where the work get done, that is why it > was sent to the IETF list. I only cc'd the IPv6 list because it ties into > the recent discussion. In fact it is not clear to me where this work belongs > because the IETF area structure is very focused around the current layers. > It is also not clear that a new area is required to create a new layer, but > maybe that would help focus work in both defining how such a layer would > interact both up and down, as well as name space and interaction protocols > along the lines of HIP/DHT/... > > The only thing that was clear to me was that the efforts to change the > behavior of lower layers only makes them more complex while creating > unintended side effects. At the same time, an optional layer between app & > transport could provide the consistency that some apps require, without > changing the widely deployed and well refined lower layers. > > Tony > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List > IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng > FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng > Direct all administrative requests to majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com > -------------------------------------------------------------------- >