RE: Proposed charter, please comment

["Michael W. Condry" <condry@intel.com>]

I would give Mark credit. Its a challenge to balance between the
requirements of the IETF infrastructure and "what makes sense"
for a group. The goal to be focused, even limited to WEB, is
a good plan to find this balance.

After the WEB documents are released the working group can expand its
goals with a re-charter.

I support Mark's position  here.
Michael
At 12:11 PM 1/26/2001 +0000, Gordon Rae wrote:
>I agree with Mark that this working group should be focussed, but 'web
>based' seems too narrow. Shouldn't the aim be to facilitate the
>interoperation of content networks that use IETF protocols? To be specific,
>I would like CDI to work well with ip-multicast protocols.
>
>Gordon Rae
>Consultant and Researcher
>============================================
>Premium Advice Limited,
>Hans Napp,
>Broadhempston,
>Devon,
>TQ9 6BD
>EMail: premium@pavilion.co.uk <mailto:premium@pavilion.co.uk>
>Voice: +44 (0)1803 813797
>Mobile: +44 (0)77-909-404-77
>============================================
>Centre for Information, Networks & Knowledge
>SPRU Science & Technology Policy Research
>Mantell Building,
>University of Sussex,
>Falmer, Brighton
>BN1 9RF
>EMail: J.G.Rae@sussex.ac.uk <mailto:J.G.Rae@sussex.ac.uk>
>=============================================
>
>
>
>}-----Original Message-----
>}From: owner-cdn@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-cdn@ops.ietf.org]On Behalf Of
>}Mark Day
>}Sent: 25 January 2001 16:45
>}To: John Martin; cdn@ops.ietf.org
>}Subject: RE: Proposed charter, please comment
>}
>}
>}> >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
>}
>}
>}
>}
>}

Michael W. Condry
Director, Network Edge Technology