RE: Proposed charter, please comment

[John Martin <jmartin@netapp.com>]

Actually we agree in fact if not in the wording. When I read "Web-based", 
that (to me) excludes RTSP, MMS et al. If consensus is that "web-based" 
means more than just HTTP, that's fine, but I'd like to see mention of both 
"static and continuous media" somewhere, just to be sure.

John
At 11:44 AM 25/01/01 -0500, Mark Day wrote:
> > >A content network is an architecture of Web-based network
> > >elements, arranged
> > >for efficient delivery of digital content.
> >
> > Why Web-based? Does that exclude non-HTTP objects? Actually, if you just
> > remove the phrase "Web-based", this reads just fine (to me).
>
>While technically correct, I worry that this moves us in the wrong direction
>(increasing generality).  I consider it quite important that the working
>group focus on the problems of delivering content within the frameworks of
>DNS, HTTP, RTSP, etc. as they exist now.
>
>For example, I think it would be a tremendous waste of time to use this
>group to develop a system for interoperation of content networks that
>required replacing the existing protocol infrastructure of the web. That
>could well be a worthy and fun project, but it would be a research project
>as opposed to a standards project.
>
>Now, I'm pretty sure that you're not trying to get us to do that, but I want
>to be sure that the charter rules it out.  I would be happy with more
>careful phrasing, and perhaps we need to catalog the things that we will not
>do instead of relying on the fuzzy phrase "Web-based." But I am wary of
>broadening the scope to any arrangement of network elements that delivers
>content efficiently.
>
>--Mark

---------------------------------------------------------------
Network Appliance           Direct / Voicemail: +31 23 567 9615
Kruisweg 799                               Fax: +31 23 567 9699
NL-2132 NG Hoofddorp               Main Office: +31 23 567 9600
---------------------------------------------------------------