IMO, solutions that do not rely on "anchors" are welcome.
Even though the charter uses that term, we are not hung up on solutions that 
have "anchors"
Besides, remember I made an attempt to refine the term with an additional one 
"deflector"… So, we do need to have some discussions around that eventually.
But I don't think we need to have that right now in the context of the charter 
text.
As long as people understand that anchor-less solutions are welcome for 
discussion, and we may eventually refine the term, we can move forward with the 
current text -- I'd say.

Alper



On May 30, 2014, at 12:03 AM, Jouni Korhonen wrote:

> Bechet,
> 
> 5/29/2014 11:52 PM, Behcet Sarikaya kirjoitti:
>> Hi Jouni,
>> 
>> I was looking at the charter text and noticed one important issue. The
>> charter seems to be stuck with the good old anchor think. Almost all
>> text is about anchoring, anchor selection, anchor reselection, and so
>> on.
>> 
>> However in the past several months, we have seen in Alper's events,
>> presentations which seem to have no anchor.
>> 
>> I don't see any active draft that talks about the anchors.
>> 
>> In view of this, my question is how are we going to go ahead with this
>> charter and meet the deadlines?
> 
> I (myself) see still value dragging along some anchoring stuff just to allow 
> smoother migration from current deployed models toward less centralized 
> architectures.
> 
> But you are right that we should not get stuck on those.. and that has not 
> been the intent either.
> 
>> Or else, are we better off with a charter text which is much less
>> dependent on the anchors, something  which could make it possible to
>> progress one of those proposals??
> 
> You are welcome to propose concrete text & change snippets to the current 
> charter text.
> 
> - Jouni
> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Behcet
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 3:50 AM, Jouni Korhonen <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Now that the gap analysis I-D is almost on the stage of leaving the WG and
>>> the requirements I-D has almost completed IESG, it would be time to return
>>> to the rechartering topic.
>>> 
>>> First, the latest revision can be found at:
>>> https://github.com/jounikor/dmm-re-charter
>>> 
>>> Second, have a look at it. There are few changes proposed by Alper eons ago
>>> and corrected milestones pointed by Behcet.
>>> 
>>> Third, let us get this finally done..
>>> 
>>> - Jouni
>>> 
>>> 4/22/2014 3:55 PM, Jouni Korhonen kirjoitti:
>>> 
>>>> Folks,
>>>> 
>>>> Sorry for letting this topic to rot in a dark for the couple of last
>>>> weeks. I'll crank out a revision shortly..
>>>> 
>>>> - Jouni & Dapeng
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dmm mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dmm mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm

_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm

Reply via email to