IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ieprep] Preferential Services

"Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb@layer3arts.com> Mon, 31 July 2006 18:32 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G7cYq-0005ij-5E; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 14:32:16 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G7cYo-0005id-Aj for ieprep@ietf.org; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 14:32:14 -0400
Received: from stsc1260-eth-s1-s1p1-vip.va.neustar.com ([156.154.16.129] helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G7cYo-0004SS-8f for ieprep@ietf.org; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 14:32:14 -0400
Received: from mail.manske.org ([65.127.251.7]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G7cYm-0005uW-BH for ieprep@ietf.org; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 14:32:14 -0400
Received: from mail.manske.org (localhost.manske.org [127.0.0.1]) by mail.manske.org (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k6VIW0Gj018308 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <ieprep@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 13:32:00 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from hcb@layer3arts.com)
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by mail.manske.org (8.13.6/8.13.4/Submit) id k6VIW0XV018307 for ieprep@ietf.org; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 13:32:00 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from hcb@layer3arts.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: mail.manske.org: nobody set sender to hcb@layer3arts.com using -f
Received: from 24-182-173-239.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com (24-182-173-239.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com [24.182.173.239]) by webmail.layer3arts.com (IMP) with HTTP for <howard@localhost>; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 13:32:00 -0500
Message-ID: <1154370720.44ce4ca0ba14e@webmail.layer3arts.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 13:32:00 -0500
From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb@layer3arts.com>
To: ieprep@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ieprep] Preferential Services
References: <72EC7AFD-0960-4EF0-B628-B8972D80C927@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <72EC7AFD-0960-4EF0-B628-B8972D80C927@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.1
X-Originating-IP: 24.182.173.239
X-manske.org-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-manske.org-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-manske.org-MailScanner-From: hcb@layer3arts.com
X-Spam-Status: No
X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-)
X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370
X-BeenThere: ieprep@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet Emergency Preparedness Working Group <ieprep.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep>, <mailto:ieprep-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ieprep@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ieprep-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep>, <mailto:ieprep-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ieprep-bounces@ietf.org

Quoting Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>:

> You know, I think one thing that trips this group up is in the title.  
> The issue this Working Group is thinking about is not so much  
> "Emergency use of the Internet", which is often about deploying a new  
> network when the usual one has been smashed by a hurricane or an  
> airplane crash, but "Precedence-related Services in the Internet".
> 
> Would it make sense, in this recharter, to call it "Preferential  
> Services" or some such thing?

Maybe. My first reaction to "Preferential Services" made me think of in-process
communications. I would argue against Precedence-Related, because the problem is
really both establishing and continuing preferential services. A significant
part of that is going to be ad-hoc provisioning and failure circumvention, as
distinct from precedence.  It's not quite MANET with respect to mobility, but
the ad-hoc-ness is a necessary part of the scope.

_______________________________________________
Ieprep mailing list
Ieprep@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email