Re: WG Review: Recharter of Internet Emergency Preparedness (ieprep)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I didn't write the proposed charter, and I don't intend to manage the next instance of the working group either. I will collaborate with the chairs on a charter if you like.

The key thing, though, is actually not this charter, as important as it is. It is the IETF leadership taking it upon itself to enable the work to progress in a timely fashion rather than having an infinite series of hurdles and road-blocks thrown in the way. Can you help us with that?

On Nov 5, 2006, at 1:25 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:

"Fred" == Fred Baker <fred@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

    Fred> I have to say that my discussions with US DoD and DHS/NCS,
    Fred> and with their counterparts in other countries, doesn't
    Fred> suggest that the set of technical mechanisms is all
    Fred> specified. If we're looking only at voice, it is maybe so,
    Fred> but they're not looking only at voice.  Questions abound
    Fred> around the mechanisms for sending an email and ensuring that
    Fred> it is delivered in a stated time interval on the order of
    Fred> minutes or that an indication of failure is returned to the
    Fred> sender, and other things.

Fred, if there are parts of the problem that clearly fall within the
IETF, can you work on a narrowly focused charter that clearly says
what you're going to work on and shows:

1) Why it is within the IETF's scope

2) What you plan to do?

From the current charter I would have no idea at all that you were
talking about email.

--Sam

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]