On Sat, 4 Nov 2006, Fred Baker wrote: > I have to say that my discussions with US DoD and DHS/NCS, and with their > counterparts in other countries, doesn't suggest that the set of technical > mechanisms is all specified. If we're looking only at voice, it is maybe so, > but they're not looking only at voice. Questions abound around the mechanisms > for sending an email and ensuring that it is delivered in a stated time > interval on the order of minutes or that an indication of failure is returned > to the sender, and other things. Which seems to be an indication that even if this is pursued in the IETF, RAI area seems like a wrong place. The better one would probably be Ops&Mgmt if there is general requirements gathering / framework work to be done. However, it's not obvious whether this is necessarily the right thing to do in the IETF or in this manner. It looks ieprep was chartered around IETF 53, and the deliverables were to be complete in 2002. Some of that work was completed relatively quick, some has taken a lot longer -- being still under evalution. Initial charter also included 'recommendations' but it's not clear to me what happened with that. It's not clear whether going on this way will achieve useful results in a useful amount of time. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf