Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter
"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Sat, 07 March 2020 07:45 UTC
Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: detnet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: detnet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00E923A0C8E; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 23:45:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.577
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.577 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, WEIRD_PORT=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=eS454QgM; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=zV7ThNkG
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4s3RsZOhcdZG; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 23:45:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B9623A0C87; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 23:45:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=48241; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1583567142; x=1584776742; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=htGBcNQ4lyx7LzVMyzY9IBkH2s9FjdedilItC6rvvxY=; b=eS454QgMIiTvgsuBosPQ36qJNEQJY0zJaqnZF7NGinFTup2v+Ra+zXA3 LmxRmQWtKY5Gelf4P81gDzOspaVKDINJ3rAfD5YWw5niWO2x7s1SVIfJ8 DMgUn4XVO1eIuQf9Pqut3ruRllFn1tdZlXVX5kk/XU5ZIvnqfT2Epe4i0 E=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:3walRBU3SUx1gKqbY1SvaTjVECHV8LGuZFwc94YnhrRSc6+q45XlOgnF6O5wiEPSA9yJ8OpK3uzRta2oGXcN55qMqjgjSNRNTFdE7KdehAk8GIiAAEz/IuTtankiAMRfXlJ/41mwMFNeH4D1YFiB6nA=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AkDQDgUGNe/5FdJa1aCh0BAQEJAREFBQGBe4ElL1AFbFggBAsqhBWDRgOKaYJfgQGIYo4ygUKBEANQBAkBAQEMAQEYAQcJBAIEAQGDKkUPRQIXgXckOBMCAwEBCwEBBQEBAQIBBQRthVYMhWMBAQEBAwEBEBEKEwEBLAsBDwIBCBEBAwEBFgsBBgMCAgIfBgsUAwYIAgQOBRsHgwQBgX1NAy4BDpxUAoE5iGJ1gTKCfwEBBYJEgkANC4IMAwaBOIkKgWqBNBqBQT+BEAEnIIIYNT6CG0kBAQIagQIaOxgHCQIHglIygiyOFIJUhXKKD45JMkQKgjyHUoIAiF6ENhyCSYghhE6LfZBDhy+CMZAkAgQCBAUCDgEBBYFpIoFYcBU7KgGCQVAYDY15JINzhRSFQXQCAROBE49JAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,525,1574121600"; d="scan'208,217";a="451810065"
Received: from rcdn-core-9.cisco.com ([173.37.93.145]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 07 Mar 2020 07:45:14 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (xch-aln-003.cisco.com [173.36.7.13]) by rcdn-core-9.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 0277jDHE012204 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sat, 7 Mar 2020 07:45:14 GMT
Received: from xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) by XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (173.36.7.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 01:45:12 -0600
Received: from xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) by xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 01:45:12 -0600
Received: from NAM10-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 01:45:11 -0600
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=ET0bVayLJEYk4JoH07NsQQnaLBarvnoelj/L0qaw22CjvwQ94gLHG7GEo4CaBr4xQ/rNiwNHgXH7yt+EaqVhCFkYTQIAiIZ8/eQuPgUjLBDVjoCZFAAgmMUcaGKk2pY7DiHdmc6jUxMEHPKtFS5HMrXQWPKY3dfTJs3sS0G0f03rapGbyaR/kK80tMm/l99KVGhqjaUz4EKE4vwLRzMP8IhCrpO+LyBPmQfUSR/fxi0j/r+8+hjtDyx2HS5tirhC8no77mqsCAxDT3Yn90VGQ6ZPB3TUp31YYccNmZX9KbSS/TNXebkMZVgCvQ52tKbRY/b+GCaJ7qF/yPhYyxgsBQ==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck;bh=htGBcNQ4lyx7LzVMyzY9IBkH2s9FjdedilItC6rvvxY=; b=KIPwtdhDvH7wc42KVCY8yH664NdBXh7YSp8LE6TdBfoMUwFKNiNN+xUBaxXhUpWBkJwXrDEqOtYkJO3qo89B9kb1t0Pbm7jrtbzwrvtvb/w54+6PeMDsIpxISHIIXXolGhLZoa/KfVErJhC7Bs6MefC98crfHftCB467QvMuoYZOvYiCFIiSUrcKKvnLjLHv2EYrpfEJoLrC5lXFyGrk1kamV15AdjxLa9MrMqntseKUKMLLTNx19D0dKGPHMR1+I3rpNbn49UiZMX73QSWQvL+gzudb54LrmjcYhqCo+MjM58V5sVUisbLuP5PZBXPrvTSzv5DkHdCEE3bW79fkJA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=htGBcNQ4lyx7LzVMyzY9IBkH2s9FjdedilItC6rvvxY=; b=zV7ThNkG4y0lIMC7h/yQez4sQxfEXDYtyB4z4o4co7GxIPMAv9kCSI3Ahb1q6A+8MM1ja3Yfk/+zrnnhRbJUn4uKCZvNBFW/cx5OUhhHLHBmG+AV+VczcswudkcfckEGtsj1t8hqXCqzhwN3mvR67N3jOdppwT/PeHlrc+Ypt3g=
Received: from MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:ea::31) by MN2PR11MB4349.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:195::17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2793.16; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 07:45:10 +0000
Received: from MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::edba:2b0f:7341:2c24]) by MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::edba:2b0f:7341:2c24%6]) with mapi id 15.20.2793.013; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 07:45:10 +0000
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: "Grossman, Ethan A." <eagros@dolby.com>
CC: DetNet Chairs <detnet-chairs@ietf.org>, DetNet WG <detnet@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter
Thread-Index: AQHV89Ka1MKL31bU7k6+AeN/py9M4qg8UkOAgABuv+0=
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2020 07:45:10 +0000
Message-ID: <4A9CFBF2-CD1C-400E-A558-D376EF0BECA0@cisco.com>
References: <VI1PR07MB4415A43D54F389223C378B89F2E30@VI1PR07MB4415.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com><CAA=duU0_G==5HXQ36t1DE=V3=yhEAwHFObtLoWoP8FKB-r7oYg@mail.gmail.com>, <BYAPR06MB4325DA84FA14E43CA846157AC4E00@BYAPR06MB4325.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR06MB4325DA84FA14E43CA846157AC4E00@BYAPR06MB4325.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=pthubert@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [2a01:cb1d:4ec:2200:780b:7ebf:1b34:db92]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 17aa2d74-7340-4e88-d407-08d7c26b76c1
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB4349:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MN2PR11MB4349BE4356F0E281278A9078D8E00@MN2PR11MB4349.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:6790;
x-forefront-prvs: 03355EE97E
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(396003)(39860400002)(366004)(136003)(376002)(346002)(189003)(199004)(4326008)(8936002)(33656002)(966005)(71200400001)(2906002)(66574012)(53546011)(54906003)(316002)(6506007)(66946007)(66476007)(64756008)(66446008)(66556008)(5660300002)(6486002)(6916009)(81156014)(81166006)(91956017)(76116006)(8676002)(36756003)(6512007)(86362001)(186003)(2616005)(478600001)(244885003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR11MB4349; H:MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: xbqIQMZQKp2vGVdL+QeZxm2hd1e2RrxL0jSJGMEkI30R7ZkozSPGSNmLGS21pT1eVU2UgPg3iitcXuGyRtuEODnSonlOGL1LYhHLxlaos/OCo+tPlbf3oW0XVBM4ymWBvPc1Od/KnVjMp3iSacr/DkwtoVPDl6SgEhMmUbktc52Z6Ah/wk/MNSifR+jz6lhavvfJ3N4ySljB1KO5nQMrjA==
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4A9CFBF2CD1C400EA558D376EF0BECA0ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 17aa2d74-7340-4e88-d407-08d7c26b76c1
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 07 Mar 2020 07:45:10.4318 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: QFdeS0cg4MUuc1wZn7jmOSBDfsbz555v0NojDRXTS3Ua6toVuaKnR763k9cKY5MClxD/+igB5Ln7DQYlxF6Pww==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB4349
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.13, xch-aln-003.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-9.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/ShTDGSuLZtq6ncWTDEv-Y8EdzyQ>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter
X-BeenThere: detnet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions on Deterministic Networking BoF and Proposed WG <detnet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/detnet>, <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/detnet/>
List-Post: <mailto:detnet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet>, <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2020 07:45:57 -0000
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2020 07:45:57 -0000
All great for me too. Please note the typo in 6TiSCH ... Regards, Pascal Le 7 mars 2020 à 02:09, Grossman, Ethan A. <eagros@dolby.com> a écrit : Hi Lou and Janos, This looks good to me also, though I have a question about the phrase “vertical requirements… this effort will detail the requirements for deterministic networks in various industries that have previously not been documented”. The last time someone brought up a “new industry use case that had not been documented for DetNet”, our response (perhaps just my personal response, but I understood it to represented the WG) was that we understand and expect there to be new use cases for DetNet as time goes on, but that as long as they were satisfied by the existing documented DetNet common properties (for example as outlined in the Use Cases draft Common Themes section) it wasn’t particularly necessary to document each new use case in a DetNet-authored RFC. So I can read the proposed text above in two ways, either “if you have a new use case, it our charter to document it” or, alternatively, “if a newly proposed use case implies addition of some new property/requirement that DetNet has not already taken into account and considered (e.g. as enumerated in the Use Case Common Themes), we will address the missing property/requirement by either incorporating it into DetNet, or by declaring that it is not supported by DetNet”. So my point is, which of these interpretations is the authors’ intent there? And if it is the latter, do we feel that the existing text makes this unambiguously clear? (Just because I read it in that ambiguous way doesn’t mean others do). All in all, nice work. Ethan (as WG member) From: Andrew G. Malis <agmalis@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 8:15 AM To: Janos Farkas <Janos.Farkas=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org> Cc: DetNet WG <detnet@ietf.org>; DetNet Chairs <detnet-chairs@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Lou and Janos, It looks good to me, especially the sections regarding the controller plane. Cheers, Andy On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 9:29 AM Janos Farkas <Janos.Farkas=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote: WG, As discussed at the last IETF, it is time for us to update our charter. We have put together the following proposal: The Deterministic Networking (DetNet) Working Group focuses on deterministic data paths that operate over Layer 2 bridged and Layer 3 routed segments, where such paths can provide bounds on latency, loss, and packet delay variation (jitter), and high reliability. The Working Group addresses Layer 3 aspects in support of applications requiring deterministic networking. The Working Group collaborates with the IEEE 802.1 Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) Task Group, which is responsible for Layer 2 operations, to ensure an aligned architecture for both Layer 2 and Layer 3. Example applications for deterministic networks include professional and home audio/video, multimedia in transportation, engine control systems, and industrial automation, as well as other general industrial and vehicular applications being considered by the IEEE 802.1 TSN Task Group. The Working Group will initially focus on solutions for networks that are under a single administrative control or within a closed group of administrative control; these include not only campus-wide networks but also can include private WANs. The DetNet WG will not address solutions for large groups of domains such as the Internet. The Working Group is responsible for the overall DetNet architecture and DetNet-specific specifications that encompasses the data plane, OAM (Operations, Administration, and Maintenance), time synchronization, management, control, and security aspects which are required to enable a multi-hop path, and forwarding along the path, with the deterministic properties of controlled latency, low packet loss, low packet delay variation, and high reliability. The work applies to point-to-point (unicast) and point-to-multipoint (multicast) flows which can be characterized in a manner that allows the network to 1) reserve the appropriate resources for the flows in advance, and 2) release/reuse the resources when they are no longer required. The work covers the characterization of flows, the encapsulation of frames, the required forwarding behaviors, as well as the state that may need to be established in intermediate nodes. Layer 3 data plane technologies that can be used include: IP and MPLS, and Layer 2 encapsulations that run over IP and/or MPLS, such as pseudowires and GRE. The Working Group will document which deployment environments and types of topologies are within (or outside) the scope of the DetNet architecture. This work focuses on the data plane aspects and is independent from any path setup protocol or mechanism. The working group will also document DetNet Controller Plane [1] approaches that reuse existing IETF solutions, such as Path Computation Element (PCE), and identify the appropriate Working Group for any extensions needed to support DetNet. Documents produced by the Working Group will be compatible with the work done in IEEE802.1 TSN and other IETF Working Groups. The Working Group's scope explicitly excludes modifications of transport protocols, OAM, Layer 3 forwarding, encapsulations, and control plane protocols, but it may define requirements for such modifications and identify the appropriate Working Group for any needed modifications. DetNet is chartered to work in the following areas: Overall architecture: This work encompasses the data plane, OAM, time synchronization, management, control, and security aspects. Data plane: This work will document how to use IP and/or MPLS to support a data plane method of flow identification and packet forwarding over Layer 3. Other IETF defined data plane technologies may also be used. Controller Plane: This work will document how to use IETF control plane solutions to support DetNet. This work includes identification of any gaps in existing solutions and identifying the appropriate Working Group for any needed extensions.. Data flow information model: This work will identify the information needed for flow establishment and control and be used by reservation protocols and YANG data models. The work will be independent from the protocol(s) used to control the flows (e.g. YANG+NETCONF/RESTCONF, PCEP or GMPLS). YANG models: This work will document device and link capabilities (feature support) and resources (e.g. buffers, bandwidth) for use in device configuration and status reporting. Such information may also be used when advertising the deterministic network elements to a control plane. Control plane related information will be independent from the protocol(s) which may be used to advertise this information (e.g. IS-IS or GMPLS extensions). Any new YANG models will be coordinated with the Working Groups that define any base models that are to be augmented. As needed, vertical requirements: This effort will detail the requirements for deterministic networks in various industries that have previously not been documented or cannot be supported using defined DetNet solutions. To investigate whether existing data plane encryption mechanisms can be applied, possibly opportunistically, to improve security and privacy. The Working Group coordinates with other relevant IETF Working Groups, including CCAMP, PCE, PALS, TEAS, OSPF, IS-IS, TSVWG, RAW, and 6TisSCH. As the work progresses, requirements may be provided to the responsible Working Group, e.g. PCE, TEAS, and CCAMP, with DetNet acting as a focal point to maintain the consistency of the overall architecture and related solutions. The WG will liaise with appropriate groups in IEEE and other Standards Development Organizations (SDOs). [1] The DetNet Controller Plane is defined in RFC 8655 as "the aggregation of the Control and Management Planes" The difference compared to the current charter is available at: https://etherpad.ietf.org:9009/p/detnet-recharter<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__etherpad.ietf.org-3A9009_p_detnet-2Drecharter&d=DwMFaQ&c=lI8Zb6TzM3d1tX4iEu7bpg&r=ZcHC6wX_gDwPDcfMaFNZiQ&m=bXn6vVroSgf2XRzk9bbkPawRx-z8QWyiPikWlcNw03o&s=abcfl7uanOC0v5Tl0RbYDVW0Bcxiqon9CNlwHMfy_LQ&e=> Our plan is to submit revised charter to the IESG after IETF 107. Given the number of remote participants, we are happy to have the discussion fully on the list. Please submit your comments on the list. Regards, Lou and Janos _______________________________________________ detnet mailing list detnet@ietf.org<mailto:detnet@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_detnet&d=DwMFaQ&c=lI8Zb6TzM3d1tX4iEu7bpg&r=ZcHC6wX_gDwPDcfMaFNZiQ&m=bXn6vVroSgf2XRzk9bbkPawRx-z8QWyiPikWlcNw03o&s=FVUOpSHy-OwCaMUnZzTxacV7Zyc8eL4gBqbSrrTchxo&e=> _______________________________________________ detnet mailing list detnet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet
- [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Janos Farkas
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Andrew G. Malis
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Grossman, Ethan A.
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Balázs Varga A
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Lou Berger
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Lou Berger
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Greg Mirsky
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Kingshuk Mandal
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong)
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Grossman, Ethan A.
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter xiong.quan
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong)
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Lou Berger
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Lou Berger
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Lou Berger
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Lou Berger
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Lou Berger
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Black, David
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Lou Berger
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Black, David
- Re: [Detnet] proposed revised Charter Lou Berger