Re: x400ops minutes, GO-MHS and the central coordination point

[Allan Cargille <[e-mail]>]

Hi, I wanted to add my comments to the discussion by Jim and Urs on
the minutes and the MHS Coordination Service.


First, I am sympathetic to Jim's concerns about the short time for
editing comments.  It is clearly desirable to have the corrected,
revised minutes included in the proceedings.

On the other hand, work is done in the IETF on a voluntary basis.
Taking minutes is not a glamorous, highly-paid job!  ;-)   Everyone who
spends all week at the IETF meeting is extremely busy upon returning to
work.  I don't think we are in a strong position to mandate having
final minutes by a short deadline!  In addition, much of the IETF
registration materials were destroyed by the hotel in a trash
compactor, including my packet for WG chairs.  I was therefore unaware
of the due date for the minutes.  I was not informed of the deadline
until yesterday, which happened to be the same day that Urs released
the draft minutes.

Also, the proceedings are to give people an idea of what happened in
the working group.  The revised draft minutes will definitely fit that
need.  We, the working group, are free to modify the "final" version
of the minutes.  It will be made available online (ftp and email server)
for the lifetime of the working group.  The minutes in the proceedings
will be identified as draft minutes.  We have complete freedom to
update the final version of the minutes.

In conclusion:  Jim, do I hear you volunteering to take the minutes
at the next IETF, and to send the draft minutes to the list within one
week of the meeting?  ;-)


Second, with regard to the discussion about the GO-MHS community:
we need to distinguish between *what was said in the meeting* and
*continuing the discussion*.  Here we are at a disadvantage, because
Urs is both the taker of the minutes, and personally interested in the
followup discussion.  Urs, can I ask that we first work to accurately
document what was said in the meeting, for the minutes?  Then we can
continue the discussion on the mailing list.

In terms of the minutes, I can only rely on my memory, because as
acting chair I did not have the opportunity to take many notes.

I recall the following:

  o There was consensus that the group supports migrating the Cosine MHS
    community to the GO-MHS Community, in principle.

  o Jim pointed out, and others agreed, that this migration must be
    thought out.  Urs has to revise the Cosine MHS documents anyway,
    so he volunteered to write up a list of issues that are involved
    in the transition and send it to the list.

  o There was a discussion about the relationship between the GO-MHS
    community and the MHS Coordination Service.  People felt that a
    community is not "open" in the Internet sense if one must pay to
    join it.  Erik H. pointed out that a GO-MHS coordination service must
    provide global coordination, regardless of financial
    contributions.  He pointed out that there are U.S. Internet
    coordination services which provide international services but are
    funded solely by the U.S., including the NIC and the IANA (naming
    authority).  There was a discussion that there is a difference
    between providing coordination and providing consulting and
    technical support.  Erik was going to work to see that the MHS
    Coordination service is able to provide coordination for the
    GO-MHS community regardless of financial contributions.  However,
    consulting and technical assistance may be limited to contributing
    members of the service.

Erik, can you please help clarify the minutes?

Like I said, first let's agree on what was said at the meeting.  After
that, we can discuss if it was right or not (ad nauseum!).

Cheers,

allan