Re: WG Review: Recharter of Internet Emergency Preparedness (ieprep)

I didn't write the proposed charter, and I don't intend to manage the  
next instance of the working group either. I will collaborate with  
the chairs on a charter if you like.

The key thing, though, is actually not this charter, as important as  
it is. It is the IETF leadership taking it upon itself to enable the  
work to progress in a timely fashion rather than having an infinite  
series of hurdles and road-blocks thrown in the way. Can you help us  
with that?

On Nov 5, 2006, at 1:25 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:

>>>>>> "Fred" == Fred Baker <[email protected]> writes:
>
>     Fred> I have to say that my discussions with US DoD and DHS/NCS,
>     Fred> and with their counterparts in other countries, doesn't
>     Fred> suggest that the set of technical mechanisms is all
>     Fred> specified. If we're looking only at voice, it is maybe so,
>     Fred> but they're not looking only at voice.  Questions abound
>     Fred> around the mechanisms for sending an email and ensuring that
>     Fred> it is delivered in a stated time interval on the order of
>     Fred> minutes or that an indication of failure is returned to the
>     Fred> sender, and other things.
>
> Fred, if there are parts of the problem that clearly fall within the
> IETF, can you work on a narrowly focused charter that clearly says
> what you're going to work on and shows:
>
> 1) Why it is within the IETF's scope
>
> 2) What you plan to do?
>
> From the current charter I would have no idea at all that you were
> talking about email.
>
> --Sam