IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ecrit] Charter & Milestones update - Comments sought

Randall Gellens <randy@qti.qualcomm.com> Mon, 21 October 2013 21:52 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@qti.qualcomm.com>
X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF28811E86B1 for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 14:52:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.537
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.537 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.667, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LGzBL8YcdKkQ for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 14:52:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wolverine02.qualcomm.com (wolverine02.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.251]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9FA411E862E for <ecrit@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 14:52:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qti.qualcomm.com; i=@qti.qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1382392354; x=1413928354; h=message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:to:from:subject: cc:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=FgdTVVIriXXKm0CJmbg3KKim0y4YXvUB5Cy02oON7fQ=; b=vVbDLHy3qdNs5UsnfndjirCr/624XEBfXvKc7uuSMhWLEjm/yajVpg2z nDAcKpgLjfvvjdKl8CSWSrejLOpVKIHYvP5U648SXPuMHtu9d0e1zq+hO Eyp5TkCL769XGEd7GkDz2J4NpcGNrd6anV2JqAM6+Ym6qcKsWEytjdNny U=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,7235"; a="82357302"
Received: from ironmsg04-r.qualcomm.com ([172.30.46.18]) by wolverine02.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 21 Oct 2013 14:52:34 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,7235"; a="625977540"
Received: from nasanexhc04.na.qualcomm.com ([172.30.48.17]) by Ironmsg04-R.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 21 Oct 2013 14:52:31 -0700
Received: from [99.111.97.136] (172.30.48.1) by qcmail1.qualcomm.com (172.30.48.17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 14:51:57 -0700
Message-ID: <p0624060ace8b511669b9@[99.111.97.136]>
In-Reply-To: <FBD5AAFFD0978846BF6D3FAB4C892ACC4864C2@SEA-EXMB-1.telecomsys.com>
References: <FBD5AAFFD0978846BF6D3FAB4C892ACC45811B@SEA-EXMB-1.telecomsys.com> <p06240602ce78cc3a5e0a@10.184.126.229> <FBD5AAFFD0978846BF6D3FAB4C892ACC484ED7@SEA-EXMB-1.telecomsys.com> <p06240601ce8b1354f008@99.111.97.136> <CAL02cgRyXMNxe-UPPFBkJtDM2UeZjgardeTeXAy9TbbU2SuWWg@mail.gmail.com> <p06240604ce8b16239896@99.111.97.136> <CAL02cgSeKxrJv2B85Mjaw2SOTWNUMXfHhPnpLhCDwGZmh9xM0w@mail.gmail.com> <p06240606ce8b20c31647@[99.111.97.136]> <FBD5AAFFD0978846BF6D3FAB4C892ACC4864C2@SEA-EXMB-1.telecomsys.com>
X-Mailer: Eudora for Mac OS X
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 14:51:55 -0700
To: Roger Marshall <RMarshall@telecomsys.com>, Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
From: Randall Gellens <randy@qti.qualcomm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Random-Sig-Tag: 1.0b28
X-Originating-IP: [172.30.48.1]
Cc: "ecrit_ietf.org" <ecrit@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] Charter & Milestones update - Comments sought
X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ecrit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit>
List-Post: <mailto:ecrit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 21:52:41 -0000

At 7:59 PM +0000 10/21/13, Roger Marshall wrote:

>  You suggested text: "any solution presented 
> must not rely on assumptions specific to a 
> given jurisdiction or region"
>
>  I think your text mod takes us too far, since 
> some of our ECRIT solutions do rely on 
> assumptions specific to a given jurisdictionŠ 
> (but not only that jurisdiction).
>
>  What's wrong with the original text, when it says,
>  "any solution presented must be useful regardless of jurisdiction"
>  I believe means that we should build "general 
> purpose solutions" that could be applied 
> anywhere (though assuming only with Internet 
> technologies).

My concern is that it could be interpreted to 
prohibit work needed for NENA or eCall, that is 
intended for use within a specific continent. 
Let's address your specific concern (general 
purpose solutions).  How about:

	"any solution presented must be general 
enough to be potentially useful in or across 
multiple regions or jurisdictions"

-- 
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly selected tag: ---------------
Arguments are to be avoided; they are always vulgar and often convincing.                                     --Oscar Wilde

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email