Re: [p2pi] [tsv-area] TANA proposed charter

Lars Eggert <> Tue, 21 October 2008 14:59 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from [] (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BD113A6B2F; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 07:59:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F9AC3A6B2F; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 07:59:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.587
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.587 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.012, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Q4VmkYeOGie1; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 07:59:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown [IPv6:2001:2060:40:1::123]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 326DB3A6943; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 07:59:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ([]) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id m9LF0gXa083618 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 18:00:44 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from
Message-Id: <>
From: Lars Eggert <>
To: "ext Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-RCN0)[VZ]" <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2)
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:00:42 -0400
References: <> <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.929.2)
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.94/8459/Tue Oct 21 15:24:15 2008 on
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 ( []); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 18:00:51 +0300 (EEST)
Cc: TSV Area <>,,
Subject: Re: [p2pi] [tsv-area] TANA proposed charter
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: P2P Infrastructure Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes"


On 2008-10-21, at 10:12, ext Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-RCN0)[VZ] wrote:
> The charter, as written looks reasonable to me.  I just hate the name
> :).

the name was an ad hoc creation, and when it was picked, some of the  
stuff that ended up being ALTO was part of the TANA scope - so it  
needed to be broader.

If we can come up with a better name I'm all ears (and you make  
several good suggestions below). What I'd like to avoid is a long  
discussion about a text string, when what I'd rather like to see is a  
discussion on whether the work we're going to attempt is reasonable.


> It should really be something like:
> "Minimizing Impact of Large Transfers" (MILT)
> "Concurrent Realtime And Bulk Applications" (CRABA)
> "Fast Transfers Adding Minimal Latency" (FTAML)
> "Bulk And Realtime Flows Interacting as Good Neighbors" (BARFIGN) --
> probably not a good one as it looks too much like "barfing" :)

I'm pretty sure CRABA would also have interesting soundex matches...
p2pi mailing list