Re: [re-ECN] Other transports than TCP in charter

[Bob Briscoe <[e-mail]>]

Ken,

That's what I hoped I had said - you've said it more clearly.


Bob

At 14:24 13/11/2009, ken carlberg wrote:
>Bob,
>
> > I want to manage expectations here.
>
>I'm positive the ADs are thrilled to read this :-)
>
>The thing I (and probably Ingemar) would ideally like to see is a 
>charter that doesn't preclude the introduction of proposed work 
>involving transports other than TCP.  This is perhaps a question to 
>the chairs/ADs, but would it be possible to have a charter that 
>makes a more general statement about transport protocols, and then 
>for now have a specific milestone that only identifies a work item 
>for TCP and no other transport protocol?
>
>the advantage in doing something like this is that if one of us were 
>to come up with an idea that addresses UDP via RTP/RTCP, then we 
>could introduce it to the group for their consideration without 
>having to ask for a change in the charter.  And by the same token, 
>by not listing other transports as a current milestone, we don't 
>commit the proposed group to something that could be considered too 
>much / too soon.
>
>-ken

________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe,                                BT Innovate & Design