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@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf