Re: Preferential Services

Quoting ken carlberg <[email protected]>:

> > You know, I think one thing that trips this group up is in the  
> > title. The issue this Working Group is thinking about is not so  
> > much "Emergency use of the Internet", which is often about  
> > deploying a new network when the usual one has been smashed by a  
> > hurricane or an airplane crash, but "Precedence-related Services in  
> > the Internet".
> >
> > Would it make sense, in this recharter, to call it "Preferential  
> > Services" or some such thing?
> 
> 
> I would agree with Fred.  whether we use the term Preferential or  
> Prioritized (my personal favorite :), I believe we gain something by  
> focusing on the core of what one wants to accomplish.
> 
> Emergency/disaster can then used to provide further context on what  
> some interested parties wish to address given an ability to provide  
> or use preferential/prioritized service.
> 
> my 2 cents,
> 
Your 2 cents are worth more than that, if you've provided an insight into
bounding two problems. One problem is prioritized/preferential communications,
which is an end-to-end service assuming the network can carry it.

"To provide" is the other part, which involves creating/preempting facilities or
ad hoc communications (not quite MANET, but MANET is worth reviewing) in not
just generic emergencies, but emergencies that involve significant damage to
network faciities, traffic overloads, or both.