Re: [PEPPERMINT] DRINKS PROPOSED Charter ..comments please.

Since I have been on vacation I have yet to read this entire thread so  
I may have missed something. Isn't defining the actual data something  
that should be done in a requirements doc?

I think that your first paragraph (up to the ':') is all we need right  
now. "routes", "service areas" ( which BTW have never been defined in  
a terminology draft) and "treatment profiles" should be dealt with  
later.

Just keep it short and sweet.

My 1.5 cents

D.

On Apr 24, 2008, at 6:45 AM, Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com>  
wrote:

>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Richard Shockey [mailto:richard@shockey.us]
>>
>> No one is proposing a solution. We are describing  that we do not  
>> propose
>> exchanging data on Collateralized Debt Instruments and Mortgage  
>> Interest
>> Swaps among SSP's
>
> Sure, I'm all in favor of getting a charter approved post-haste.   
> Even if it means my ideas for "Mortgage Interest eXchanges" (MIX)  
> will have to wait for a charter update.  (too bad too, 'cause a  
> draft-drinks-mix would have been a recipe for success in my opinion)
>
> But seriously, how "detailed" do we need to be in the charter  
> regarding this data?  I think Daryl's proposed data with some minor  
> nits is broad enough not to cause heartburn later, while not letting  
> us get drunk in the possibilities. :)
>
> How about this:
>
> [begin]
> The scope will be limited to defining the following criteria  
> necessary for a SSP to respond with the necessary Session  
> Establishment Data (SED) for both internal and external purposes:
>
>        + Routes
>                - Destination SIP/SIPS/TEL URI Egress and Ingress  
> Routes
>                - Relevant route names, identifiers, and services
>                - Attributes affecting route selection
>        + Service Areas
>                - Individual, ranges, or groups of user-agent  
> identifiers
>                - Route-to-service-area associations
>        + Treatment Profiles
>                - Priority
>                - Location
>
> The mechanism(s) chosen should be extensible, in case additional  
> criteria are deemed necessary to achieve the goals of the WG in the  
> future.
> [end]
>
> -hadriel
> _______________________________________________
> PEPPERMINT mailing list
> PEPPERMINT@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint
_______________________________________________
PEPPERMINT mailing list
PEPPERMINT@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/peppermint