[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Tin-man charter

From my former experience as co-chair of the IPPM WG: The IPPM working group had a member who was very active in the ITU-T and acted as an unofficial liaison.....periodically he would update the working group on issues which affected the IPPM WG efforts although mostly the ITU-T ended up referencing the IETF work (due to efforts of this unofficial liaison). There was a milestone for the IPPM WG to create a document which compared the efforts but the work was never completed due to noone stepping up to the plate to be the editor.

I agree that a cross-reference/survey document for security requirements specified in other standards bodies is work that can be done in parallel with the framework. I'll offer to help gather information Chris.

George...who is editor of the framework doc? I'll volunteer to write if noone else has yet.

- merike

At 06:58 AM 6/17/2004, George Jones wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jun 2004, Chris Lonvick wrote:

> I know that some work has been done with the ITU-T.  However, I'll agree
> that this WG should probably not be the first test case in this
> area.  :-)

Thank-you !

> I'd agree with that.  I was thinking that the due-date for the completion
> of this proposed ID should be the same time as the framework.  I can
> attempt to get the core material in the ID quickly so that it's available
> to the framework'ers sooner.  Does that help?

I think that makes a lot of sense.  The framework and the survey of
other work can mature together.   The survey doc can help shape
the definition of work to be done in the framework doc.

Give me a title.  If there's no objection, I'll add it to the proposed
charter.

Now, if we can get some go-ahead from IESG on chartering and
scheduling...

Thanks,
---George