Subject: SVRLOC WG IMPORTANT: SLPv2 next step?

From: Erik Guttman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 18:26:11 +0200 (MET DST)

I posted mail 3 weeks ago requesting feedback on whether we
should recharter the WG to move SLPv2 to draft standard.
See http://www.srvloc.org/hypermail/0670.html

I have so far received no response.  We will not pursue 
broadening the charter unless there is a clear positive
response.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

         ***Please*** respond to the following three questions:

         ONE:   Do you support rechartering the SVRLOC WG to
                pursue advancing SLPv2 to Draft Standard?

         TWO:   Will you actively work on reviewing drafts of 
                SLPv2bis as they appear?

         THREE: If Yes, what is your opinion of the change list in
          
  ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-guttman-svrloc-slpv2bis-01.txt

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We can still work on advancing SLPv2 to draft standard
without the SVRLOC WG.  What is needed is:

 (1) Reworking RFC 2608, as per

     ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-guttman-svrloc-slpv2bis-01.txt 

 (2) Interoperability testing showing that every feature in the
     updated document is interoperable between at least two 
     independent implementations.  This has to be written up as
     a formal interoperability report.

 (3) Writing a SLPv2 MIB and submitting it for advancement to
     RFC

It will be useful to revise the SLP API (RFC 2614) for consistency
with the SLPv2 after revision of RFC 2608, so that any change to 
the protocol will be surfaced at the API.  It is not clear whether
any change will be necessary at this time (for backward compatibility).

***If*** there is sufficient interest, Jim Kempf and I will publish
an internet draft with a full update to RFC 2608.  

Separately, ***if*** there is sufficient interest, I will pursue
rechartering SVRLOC to complete this work.  

In my opinion, the current discussion on the mailing list does not 
show interest in rechartering SVRLOC, though it has been responsive 
to revising RFC 2608.

Erik

---

From: Evan Hughes <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:34:55 -0400 (EDT)

WRT rechartering: What further issues with SLP must be dealt with?

e