Re: Reminder: BoF in IETF 68 in Prague

On Sat, Mar 17, 2007 at 12:36:31PM +0100,
 Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> wrote 
 a message of 20 lines which said:

> Oops, so that's "FSM", I wondered why the name of the Jabber room is
> "fsm"... :-)

The idea of the Area Directors was that "Cosmogol" is a (possible)
solution and "FSM" is more a problem statement. They prefer the
process to be more open, and not to mention the solution in the title
of the BoF.

> BTW, I stumbled about an article which might be interesting for some
> kind of "FSM motivation":
> 
> <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.gen-art/1658>
> Subject: Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-pim-sm-bsr-10.txt
> [...]
> | Essentially, we convinced ourselves (and the WG), that the
> | state machine does indeed cover all cases, although not in
> | a formal manner.

Yes, this is exactly the problem we are trying to solve. Thanks for
the pointer.

_______________________________________________
Cosmogol mailing list
Cosmogol@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cosmogol