Hi Brian,
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Brian Haberman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 7/22/14 10:49 AM, Jouni Korhonen wrote: >> Folks, >> >> The agenda has been slightly updated (shuffling around the slots and >> arranging more time to the charter/next steps discussion). Some >> presenters are affected slightly (-5 minutes). see >> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/90/agenda/agenda-90-dmm >> >> Regarding the re-chartering and the next steps. We have a tight deadline >> to meet if we want to ship the new charter text to the next IESG >> telechat. Brian will reveal the gory details of the expected >> re-chartering process and timelines. >> >> We are also supposed to come up (again) with a rought agreement of the >> deployment architecture(s) that DMM "functional elements" map into. Sorry but I don't understand why we have to work on deployment architectures? I don't remember any such work before in IP mobility. Is there any RFC that can educate me on this? I understand that some architecture work is needed. As far as I know almost all solution drafts have an architecture. Wouldn't that be enough? Kind regards, Behcet >This >> will be discussed as a part of the re-chartering slot and recapping the >> discussions we had earlier. >> >> We are also supposed to come up with a rough agreement how to progress >> from now on. This could mean (note the conditionality here) a series of >> interim meetings and setting up small groups (or design teams) to work >> on the initial set of the solution space drafts. We need to step out of >> the "progress every second IETF meeting" mode ;) > > http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/interim-meetings.html > >> >> Also keep in mind that the start of the new work poses some >> serialization whether we want or now: first stabilize charter & reach >> rough consensus on the deployment models/functional elements. These can >> be done in parallel. Note that rough consensus does not mean a ready >> spec or spec at all. Second execute with the solutions space.. the >> deployment models work might benefit from having a slight heads up >> before other drafts. These can be done in parallel, though. As a >> reminder, the charter may change on the route before it gets approved >> but we can do the opportunistic thing and start working as if the >> charter were already "approved" when the WG ships it. >> >> - 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
