[Ieprep] re-charter?
"Ken Carlberg" <carlberg@g11.org.uk> Wed, 20 April 2005 21:46 UTC
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA24916 for <ieprep-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 17:46:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DONCy-0001N3-GV for ieprep-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 17:58:08 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DOMzr-0007xA-Fh; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 17:44:35 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DOMzk-0007vp-3e for ieprep@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 17:44:28 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA24596 for <ieprep@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 17:44:25 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200504202144.RAA24596@ietf.org>
Received: from athena.hosts.co.uk ([212.84.175.19]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DONB1-0001FQ-K5 for ieprep@ietf.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 17:56:08 -0400
Received: from [69.138.71.61] (helo=albers) by athena.hosts.co.uk with esmtpa (Exim 4.44) id 1DOMzZ-0005Kk-Pk for ieprep@ietf.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:44:19 +0100
From: Ken Carlberg <carlberg@g11.org.uk>
To: ieprep@ietf.org
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 17:43:21 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Thread-Index: AcVF8fjVwcgLHvE3SI2sBiERHLKOjw==
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: f4c2cf0bccc868e4cc88dace71fb3f44
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Ieprep] re-charter?
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>
Sender: ieprep-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ieprep-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.9 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: e8a67952aa972b528dd04570d58ad8fe
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<warning: this is a bit lengthy and kind of resembles a noel-gram :) > a couple of months ago there was a brief thread on this list that discussed the possibility of rechartering IEPREP. currently, the charter focuses the attention of IEPREP to requirements and framework documents. however, it had been pointed out in that re-chartering thread that there are several individual drafts floating in the I-D ether that have varying degrees of relevance to the subject of emergency communications, and yet don't seem to have a home. at both the washington-ietf and the minneapolis-ietf (and actually earlier meetings if one wants to include some of the rsvp extention work) there were attempts to discuss these drafts at the TSVWG meetings, but there wasn't much reaction. Joe Touch's comment at each meeting (my paraphrasing) that the "silence was deafening" seemed to capture the moment. on the other hand, it also seemed that a considerable chunk of the material that Fred Baker discussed (ie, the MLPP drafts) was quite outside of the interest of the usual suspects that attend TSVWG. there seemed to be considerably more discussion on Fred's and James's material at the San Diego IETF meeting than at the DC and Minneapolis combined -- the minutes of each meeting may bear this out, but then that is also dependent on who takes the minutes. while I can't speak for Fred or James as to the reason their MLPP drafts have been forwarded to TSVWG (one assumes because it is the catch-all for transport area drafts that have no other home), I can certainly see that the current charter of IEPREP prevented their inclusion in IEPREP (because it only deals with requirements and frameworks). so that takes us to the subject of this long winded email. In the old charter thread, James suggested (words to the effect of) we should explore rechartering IEPREP so that it can now address the subject of solutions. its my understanding that some folks at the Minneapolis IETF discussed this topic in the hallways, but I am in the dark as to the ultimate conclusions. soooooo, I'd like to revisit this discussion on the list. specifially, - what are the objections (if any) to expanding the charter? (and if the chairs/ADs have objections, now is the time to chime in :-) - assuming we have rough consensus of exploring the subject of re-chartering, what should the new charter say? Note, and this is a whopper of a caveat! All of us need to be in agreement that *proposed solutions* could only be considered in IEPREP where no other *applicable* active working group exists. Note #2...Perhaps a starting point for any discussion of a proposed new charter is agreeing on what is considered a solution :-) comments? -ken _______________________________________________ Ieprep mailing list Ieprep@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep
- [Ieprep] re-charter? Ken Carlberg
- Re: [Ieprep] re-charter? Fred Baker
- Re: [Ieprep] re-charter? Rex Buddenberg
- RE: [Ieprep] re-charter? Ken Carlberg
- Re: [Ieprep] re-charter Richard F Kaczmarek