Re: A thought... Re: BOF Speakers Needed

["John G. Waclawsky" <jgw@cisco.com>]

James. Yes, I understand with emphasis on the work "might". I am not fighting
this. It just seems that it must be a really difficult task for anyone to come to
the IETF with a complex problem (or a set of requirements) to find out if they fit
for all the pieces.    Regards  John

James Kempf wrote:

> John,
>
> Well, one way (somewhat crude) is to browse through http://www.ietf.org
> to the Working Groups page and look at all the charters. That would
> tell you what might be mobility related.
>
>                 jak
>
> >Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:53:56 -0400
> >From: "John G. Waclawsky" <jgw@cisco.com>
> >To: grenville armitage <gja@ureach.com>
> >CC: more@ops.ietf.org
> >Subject: Re: A thought... Re: BOF Speakers Needed
> >
> >This brings me back to my original question. How do we know what has or is
> >being looked at so we can better "focus" the document. While I agree some of
> >this can and should be done up front to reduce redundancy... but isn't one of
> >the purposes of the BOF to better identify overlap with IETF activities and
> >omissions too. I may be misinterpreting what is expected as input and output
> >to a BOF. Are there rules and regulations somewhere?  Regards  John
> >
> >grenville armitage wrote:
> >
> >> > The
> >> > idea behind this BOF is to discuss the requirements in
> >> > draft-reynolds-mobile-isp-requirements-00.txt and present any additional
> >> > requirements for wireless ISPs.
> >>
> >> At the risk of sounding negative, I'd suggest the BOF also
> >> discuss how to *remove* requirements from the cited draft.
> >>
> >> Having looked through the document, it seems that upwards
> >> of 30% of the listed requirements aren't specific to the
> >> "wireless Internet" or "Mobile ISP" communities. There is
> >> a lot of good stuff in there that qualifies as "the functionality
> >> any good ISP would want to have". But I'd suggest taking scissors
> >> to anything that isn't specifically a unique requirement to support
> >> mobility or roaming. (e.g. much of the text relating to security,
> >> authentication, accounting, etc isn't really unique...)  You'll
> >> end up with a more focussed document that will make it easier to
> >> explain to the rest of the IETF what MORE is trying to contribute.
> >>
> >> cheers,
> >> gja
> >> ____________________________________________________________________
> >> Grenville Armitage                http://members.home.net/garmitage/
> >
> >