Re: [Monami6] Do we need to update the Monami6 charter ?

Hi Erik, everyone,

> > I'm also starting a new thread on the charter, following the
> > discussion on the "I-D ACTION:draft-bagnulo-shim6-mip-00.txt thread"
> > where Erik wrote, on 050726:
> > 
> > "I think that Monami6 should look at both multiple CoAs and multiple
> > HoAs and understand the interrelationships between MIP/Nemo and
> > shim6.":
> > 
> > I'm positive about writing this explicitly in the Monami6 charter if
> > this is a consensus.  What the other people think ?
> 
> FWIW I chose the wording "look at" with some care. I think that
> monami6 should look at, and understand how things can/might interact,
> even if monami6 only ends up standardizing extensions for dealing with
> multiple CoAs. (Of course, monami6 might also come up with the
> architecture for how MIP6 and shim6 should interact, i.e. do more work
> in this space. But even if it doesn't, there is a need to understand
> that part of the pie.)

OK, very good, it is our intention, as one could understand from reading
draft-montavont-mobileip-multihoming-pb-statement.   However, this is
entering into the details and my concern is whether our not all our
intentions should be stated explicitly in the charter. Also, I'm
wondering if this would require a dedicated output document or
milestone. 

In my opinion, it's too ealry to write down all intentions and it would
make  the charter longer, so I choose not to  write this in the charter.
But if more folks thinks we should, then we will add more text.

I take it is one of the items to debate when discussing the charter next
Friday.

Thierry

_______________________________________________
Monami6 mailing list
Monami6@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6