Jouni and Alper

On 2014/05/31, at 2:08, Jouni Korhonen <[email protected]> wrote:

> Agree.

+1

The text looks good to me. I am eager to have solution discussion.

ryuji

> 5/30/2014 8:57 AM, Alper Yegin kirjoitti:
>> 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

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

Reply via email to