RE: comments about the draft charter

[<john.loughney@nokia.com>]

Hi Marcelo,


> i may agree that different solutions may be required for different scenarios.
> Would be good enough to rephrase it as the following?
> 
> - Solutions 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 solutions are also
> useful when both ends support the shim.
> 
> I guess that the same rewording is needed in the previous item which 
> states that:
> 
>   o A solution for site exit router selection that works when each ISP
>         uses ingress filtering, i.e. when the chosen site exit needs to be
>         related to the source address chosen by the host. This solution
>         should work whether or not the peer site supports the shim6 protocol.
> 
> (i guess that in the case of ingress filtering more than one solutions 
> are likely)

I think that text is better

John