charter [Re: how mobile do we want to be]

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Dave Crocker wrote:
>     "The first
>      paragraph must give a brief summary of the problem area, basis,
>      goal(s) and approach(es) planned for the working group.  This
>      paragraph can be used as an overview of the working group's
>      effort.
>
>      To facilitate evaluation of the intended work and to provide on-
>      going guidance to the working group, the charter must describe the
>      problem being solved and should discuss objectives and expected
>      impact with respect to:..."
>
> Your initial response was that this is a difficult effort to summarize.
> Apparently it does not strike you as boding poorly for the likely outcome of
> this work.  If the charter cannot summarize the problem and the benefit, what
> are the odds that the community is going to be clear about the concrete
> benefits?  For that matter, what is the likelihood that the working group
> participants are going to have rough consensus about the problem, goal, or
> utility?

To me, it doesn't seem to be too difficult to summarize this.  Well, I 
didn't try ;-).

After all, we are not solving "the site multihoming problem" so we 
don't reference an architecture document -- just one but possibly 
important subset of it.  Namely, connection survivability across 
failures when using multiple PA addresses... everything else is bonus.

--
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings