Re: [Int-area] intarea charter

[Margaret Wasserman <mrw at lilacglade.org>]

Hi Fred,

On Oct 2, 2009, at 11:28 AM, Templin, Fred L wrote:

> Margaret,
>
> > Although I support the use of milestones to track work items, I would
> > prefer to see the SEAL milestone dropped from the charter until we  
> > can
> > confirm that the above conditions have been met for that item.  I
> > personally think they have been demonstrated for the other two items
> > (IPID and tunneling issues), but I would not object to holding off on
> > those items if anyone else would prefer that we check that these
> > conditions have been met before including them.
>
> It may come as no great surprise, but I prefer to
> retain the three milestones currently on the list.

My message may have come across more negatively than I meant it...   
Although I'd need to spend more time understanding existing tunneling  
protocols to form a solid opinion, I have nothing against  the idea of  
publishing the SEAL specification.

I do think that we need to be careful, especially in a somewhat open- 
focus WG, not to end up with WG milestones for which there isn't solid  
WG support, as described in the conditions I listed from the TSVWG  
charter.  It is quite possible that SEAL will meet those conditions  
within the new intarea WG, I just don't personally think that we've  
demonstrated that it meets those conditions, yet.  In some cases, that  
may just be because we haven't asked the questions yet.

Margaret