Re: [lisp-interest] While we're waiting for lisp@ietf.org to come up.....

[Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>]

Joe's recollection matches mine. Basically, I saw a great interest in 
the meeting last time to work on this space. But we also saw comments 
during the meeting that indicated that the work would better fit IRTF at 
this stage, perhaps as an independent subgroup of the RRG or something 
like that. This is the reason I asked the questions at the end of the 
meeting as I did. Most of the room indeed thought that IRTF would be a 
better fit. My conclusion was that we should go ahead with the advice of 
the community and try to create something in the IRTF.

What has happened since then is that I've offered various approaches to 
doing this, but the Lisp team has not wanted to do it, and would rather 
work in the IETF.

All this being said, we need to acknowledge that most of the time in 
Dublin was spent in the technical details discussion and the way forward 
certainly deserves further discussion.

I see two ways forward: (a) we have more community discussion on list or 
in a 2nd BOF to convince ourselves that the community wants to create a 
WG or (b) we go back to the advice that the Dublin meeting gave us.

I'm fine with either approach, as long as the community supports the 
idea. But I think we need to do one of these, because I find the IETF-73 
situation suboptimal. Both the sub-RG and the WG approach would allow me 
to grant ample time in the agenda for the work, either in the meeting 
itself or in interim meetings if we want even more time. Now we don't 
have that. As a result some of the Lisp presentations are now popping up 
in GROW, etc. But while we can discuss some useful operational aspects 
in GROW, its not the place to develop the experimental RFCs that we had 
planned to do. As I said on the mike in GROW, if the IETF wants to have 
an LISP WG, lets have one. If we do not want to, lets not attempt to 
simulate one in other WGs.

Jari