RE: Loops (RE: CPIM changes)

> I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm straying too far off actual
> history here -- but, assuming that the forgoing is a fair account
> of how we got where we are today, the issue of gatewaying to
> protocols that aren't under the aegis of the IETF doesn't really
> seem to be in scope.

Part of the problem is that the history itself is a source of contention.  A
number of recent threads have been driven by Dave Crocker's concern that the
mission of The Nine was focused on gatewaying, and that focus had been lost.
Recently we had a message from Jonathan Rosenberg in which he observed that
his recollection of participating in The Nine was different.  We have some
unique handicaps on scope issues in this WG due to the way in which the
original effort fell apart and was redirected but the charter was not
adjusted to match, followed by multiple swaps of chairs.

That said, I basically agree with your summary history.

--Mark





  [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, please]