Subject: Updated Charter and acronym change

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 14:26:24 -0700

Folks,

Attached is an updated proposed charter that the chairs and ADs have 
reached consensus on.  Most of the changes are related to making it current 
(i.e., remove completed work items, updated milestones, revise some work 
items to reflect current work, etc.).

After some thought the chairs and ADs think it would be best to also change 
the working group acronym from IPng to IPv6.  The down side of this is that 
new drafts will have to be labeled as IPv6 (i.e., 
draft-ietf-ipv6-xxxx-00.txt) and this may cause some additional work 
keeping track of existing drafts.  The other issue is that the online 
version charter at http://www.ietf.org will not list the documents produced 
while the working group was named IPng.  This is being addressed by 
creating a link to the old charter in the new charter.

Our conclusion is that changing the working group acronym from IPng to IPv6 
will cause some short term annoyances, overall it will be simpler to have 
the working group name and acronym match.

Please let us know if you disagree.

Thanks,
Bob Hinden and Steve Deering

p.s. We will also see about making both ipng and ipv6 work for the mailing 
list.

_____________________________________________________________________

IP Version 6 Working Group (IPv6)

Chair(s):

     Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
     Steve Deering <[email-masked]>

Document Editor

     Bob Hinden ([email-masked])

Internet Area Director(s):

     Thomas Narten <[email-masked]>
     Erik Nordmark <[email-masked]>

Internet Area Advisor:

     Thomas Narten <[email-masked]>

Mailing Lists:

     General Discussion:[email-masked]
     To Subscribe: [email-masked]
     In Body: in body: subscribe ipng
     Archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng/mail-archive

Web Pages:

     Charter: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/ipv6-charter.html
     Working group info: http://playground.sun.com/ipv6/
     Previous charter: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/ipngwg-charter.html

Description of Working Group:

     IP version 6 or IPv6 (also formerly known as IP Next Generation or IPng)
     is intended to support the continued growth of the Internet, both in
     size and capabilities, by offering a greatly increased IP address space
     and other enhancements over IPv4.  The IP Next Generation (IPng) working
     group was originally chartered by the IESG to implement the
     recommendations of the IPng Area Directors as outlined at the July 1994
     IETF meeting and in "The Recommendation for the IP Next Generation
     Protocol," RFC1752, January 1995.  Most of the tasks in that original
     charter have been completed, and the core IPv6 protocol specifications
     are now on the IETF standards track.

     This charter focuses on completing the remaining work items and providing
     a home for IPv6 work that spans multiple IETF working groups.  The
     working group is being renamed the IP Version 6 Working Group (IPv6)
     because it is a better description of the working group's focus.

     The specific working group's ongoing responsibilities are as follows:

      - Complete work from the original charter and follow-on work, as
        outlined below.

      - Keep all IPv6 working group documents moving along publication /
        standardization track.

      - Serve as a review board and body of competence and coordination for
        IPv6 architectural issues that span multiple IETF working groups.

      - Provide a home for IPv6-related work that doesn't fit in an existing
        IETF working group and doesn't merit a working group of its own.

      - Provide technical input to the IAB, IANA and Internet Address
        Registries with regard to IPv6 address allocation policies and
        procedures.

     The list of the working group's current work items is as follows:

      - Revise and advance to Draft Standard the IPv6 Address
        Architecture document [RFC 2373]
      - Revise IPv6 Aggregatable Unicast Addresses [RFC 2374],
        removing the policy aspects that are considered RIR issues.
      - Complete work on recommended address-selection algorithms
      - Revise ICMPv6 spec [RFC 2463] (scope-exceeded err, no error to
        redirect, editorial)
      - Revise Generic Tunneling spec [RFC 2473] (add bidirectional
        tunnels)
      - Update Basic and Advanced API specs [RFC 2553, RFC 2292]
      - Complete Scoped Address Architecture spec and any necessary revisions
        to other working group drafts required to properly implement support
        for IPv6 address scoping
      - Work on host-based solutions to site-multihoming problems (in
        coordination with multi6)
      - Complete work on local IPv6 networking as part of IPv6
        plug-and-play (to be coordinated with other WGs as appropriate,
        e.g., dnsext, zeroconf, etc.)
      - Document IPv6 renumbering model
      - Complete the IPv6 Node Information Queries spec
      - Revise and update the base IPv4/IPv6 MIBs and produce a new
        consistent set of MIBs that cover IPv4 and IPv6 together.
        RFCs to be looked at together: 2011, 2012, 2013, 2096, 2851,
        2452, 2454, 2465, 2466 and possibly 3019.

     New work items not listed above require the approval of the working
     group and Internet Area directors before they will be taken on by the
     working group.

     The working group would welcome contributions on the following topics
     (this is not an exhaustive list):

      - Flow label standardization
      - Solutions to other multihoming issues, beyond those specific to
        site-multihoming
      - Integration of autoconfiguration, mobility, DNS, service discovery
        and other technologies to enhance IPv6 plug-and-play
      - IPv6 dial-up issues relating to address assignment, use of Neighbor
        Discovery, etc. (not including AAA work)
      - Specifications for IPv6 over additional media
      - Host use of anycast; TCP use of anycast
      - Support for multi-link subnets (single subnet spans multiple links)
      - Scope-name discovery
      - IPv6 protocol extensions to accommodate mobile wireless networks.

Goals and Milestones:

   Jun 2001    Revise IPv6 Address Architecture and resubmit to IESG for
               Draft Standard

   Jul 2001    Revise IPv6 Aggregatable Unicast Addresses and submit for
               Draft Standard

   Jul 2001    Resubmit the IPv6 Node Information Queries spec

   Aug 2001    Compete Address Selection specification and submit for Proposed
               Standard

   Dec 2001    Update ICMP document and resubmit for Draft Standard

   Dec 2001    Complete DNS Discovery draft and submit for Proposed Standard

   Dec 2001    Update Generic Tunneling specification and resubmit for
               Proposed Standard

   Dec 2001    Complete updates to Basic and Advanced API specifications
               and submit for Informational

   Mar 2002    Complete Scoped Address Architecture and submit for Proposed
               Standard

   May 2002    Submit document describing IPv6 renumbering model for
               Informational.

_____________________________________________________________________

--------------------------------------------------------------------
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 [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Robert Elz <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2001 18:28:18 +0700

Date:        Fri, 22 Jun 2001 14:26:24 -0700
    From:        Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
    Message-ID:  <[email-masked]>

  | After some thought the chairs and ADs think it would be best to also change 
  | the working group acronym from IPng to IPv6.

Why?   This seems all gloss, no substance, and a bunch of meaningless
work and disruption for no benefit.

The only real advantage to doing this would be if somewhere on the
horizon was a WG for an even newer generation of IP.

  | Our conclusion is that changing the working group acronym from IPng to IPv6 
  | will cause some short term annoyances, overall it will be simpler to have 
  | the working group name and acronym match.

The working group name, as I understand it, is currently "IPNG".  That's
what the current charter calls it (with ipngwg as its acronym).  You'll only
make them match if you're changing the working group name as well (which it
appears you are).

If the "next" in the label is the problem, given that we want to give
the impression that we're there already, just redefine that to "new"
which is certainly still true.   Before ipng (ipv6) ceases being new
this WG ought to be extinct.

The only hint of why is in the proposed new charter itself ...

     The working group is being renamed the IP Version 6 Working Group (IPv6)
     because it is a better description of the working group's focus.

which I don't follow at all, IPng and IPv6 are the same thing (for the
past 7 years, and the next 7 I hope).   Whatever one means, so does the
other - the focus is identical.

  | p.s. We will also see about making both ipng and ipv6 work for the mailing 
  | list.

There's no need to do that even if the name change occurs - the mailing
list could retain its old identity (poisson still uses "poised" as its
list name, which was the WG name 2 generations of WGs ago, and dnsext
uses namedroppers which was never a WG name, but has been the DNS mailing
list though a whole stck of WGs).

I have no problems with anything of substance in the charter, though I
do find the juxtaposition of the following two paragraphs amusing, to
say the least...

Which is to say, we can't do anything not listed above, but we want to
do all of the following (none of which was listed above).   Weird...

kre

ps: do you really expect June 2001 milestones to be met?

---

From: Steve Deering <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 11:41:25 -0700

At 6:28 PM +0700 6/23/01, Robert Elz wrote:
>  | After some thought the chairs and ADs think it would be best to also
>  | change the working group acronym from IPng to IPv6.
>

The main reason for the name change is to make it easier for people
to find the online and meeting information about IPv6.  The entry
for this working group on the IETF web site's list of WGs currently
says "ipngwg IPNG".  That's hardly an obvious place to look for
IPv6-related information, for anyone who isn't an IETF old-timer.
("IPNG?  What's that?  Internet Portable Network Graphics?
Internet PiNG?")

Also, as it is now, one has to give a little history lesson every
time one mentions this working group's name.

>IPng and IPv6 are the same thing (for the past 7 years, and the next
>7 I hope).   Whatever one means, so does the other - the focus is identical.

IPng was the working term for whatever the IETF was going to choose as
the next version of IP, while it was trying to make that determination
(remember the temporary IPng Area?).  Once a decision was made, the
protocol was officially named (and numbered) IPv6 and that's what
everyone now calls it, both inside and outside the IETF, apart from
a few curmudgeons.

>do all of the following (none of which was listed above).   Weird...

No, it's trying to encourage contributions on specific additional
topics, but noting that they will be subject to an approval process.
"Approval" is one possible outcome of the approval process.  Some
other possible outcomes are formation of a new working group or
IRTF research group, delegation to different existing WG or RG,
or simple rejection.

Steve