RE: comments about the draft charter

[<john.loughney@nokia.com>]

Marcelo,

> i would add an additional item here:
> 
> - A solution to establish new communications after an outage has 
> occurred that does not requires shim support from the non-multihomed 
> end of the communication. The wg will explore if such solution is also 
> useful when both ends support the shim.
> 
> imho this is relevant becuase it would provide an incremental 
> deployment model to the solution. If this is not provided, it is all or 
> nothing approach w.r.t. to fault tolerance i.e. if the other end 
> support the shim, then you get all the benefits but if the other end 
> does not supports the shim then no additional fault tolerance is 
> achieved.

Do you think that there is 'a' solution?  I have a feeling that there
are multiple solutions, at least for different scenarios.  I feel somewhat
uncomfortable about adding an item for working on a solution; if people
feel strongly about this, then maybe it would be reasonable to create an
information / BCP about mechansims to provide recovery after an outage.

John