Re: [homenet] [Anima] ANIMA scope + homenet interaction + charter v15

Hi Linda,
> Beniot,
>
> Is "professionally-managed networks" same as "network service provider network"?
It was intended to say: as opposed to just plug-and-play.
This could be a managed service offered by a ISP, gas meters service in 
a city, etc.

Regards, B.
>
> Linda
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anima [mailto:anima-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Benoit Claise
> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 3:14 PM
> To: anima@ietf.org; homenet@ietf.org
> Subject: [Anima] ANIMA scope + homenet interaction + charter v15
>
> Dear all,
>
> [sorry for double-posting, but we need the specific feedback from the HOMENET community]
>
> 1. scope
> I finished reading the ANIMA mailing list and, based on the feedback, Joel, Ted, and I would like to clarify the ANIMA scope for "the set of specific reusable infrastructure components that support autonomic interactions between devices" (quoting the charter)
>
> The charter currently mentions:
>       The ANIMA working group will initially focus on enterprise, ISP networks and IoT.
>
> Multiple tracks were discussed on the mailing list.
>       * keep enterprise, ISP networks and IoT
>       * focus on enterprise and ISP networks
>       * everything, but the initial focus is enterprise and carrier?
>       * professionally-managed networks
>
> It seems to us that "professionally-managed networks" is what ANIMA is after. And it's potentially a distraction to try to segment the scope based on enterprise, ISP, homenet, or IoT. What is IoT after all?
>
> OLD:     The ANIMA working group will initially focus on enterprise, ISP
> networks and IoT.
> NEW:    The ANIMA working group focuses on professionally-managed networks.
>
> Does it sound about right?
>
> 2. Overlap with HOMENET
> This distinction in point 1 might help regarding the potential overlap of the solution for distributed IPv6 prefix management.
> Btw, the new charter has been adapted:
> OLD:  A solution for distributed IPv6 prefix management within a network.
> NEW: the solution for distributed IPv6 prefix management within a large-scale network
>
> Also, The HOMENET collaboration has been stressed in the charter.
>
> 3. Others
> I believe I took care of the others changes proposed on the mailing. If this is not the case, let me know.
> At this point in time, please provide concrete change to the charter text if some issues persist.
> Charter v15 has just been posted, and you can review the detailed changes at https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fcharter-ietf-anima%2Fwithmilestones-00-14.txt&difftype=--html&submit=Go!&url2=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fcharter-ietf-anima%2Fwithmilestones-00-15.txt
>
>
> 4. Security Advisor.
> I have requested one for ANIMA to the security ADs.
>
> Regards, Benoit
>
> _______________________________________________
> Anima mailing list
> Anima@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
> .
>