Re: draft-ietf-impp-im-01 (was: Re: WG Last Call on multiple docu ments (deadline Jan 12))

Mark,

Wednesday, January 8, 2003, 7:48:01 AM, you wrote:
>>           So, the first requirement is that there be clear, documented
>>           consensus about the PRECISE goal of the working group.
>>
>>           Folks need to appreciate just how remarkable it is that two
>>           document authors could be holding such different perceptions of
>>           that goal, at this point.
>>
>>           Mark -- I believe this is yours to resolve.

Mark> Um... given that you agree on what belongs in the document, it's not clear
Mark> there's anything to resolve. ;-)

Mark> I started to compose a meandering ramble through the history

thank you for not including it.  i only included a bit of my own view
of history to explain my own sense of things now, not to debate
whether my view was right.  I, too, do not want to focus on history,
but rather want to make sure that we are clear about the current work.


Mark> So the gatewaying that would be needed would be among protocols in the "IMPP
Mark> family" (however dysfunctional that family might be ;-)) and thus 2778/2779
Mark> made sense as shared assumptions and aspirations.  Ease of gatewaying with
Mark> existing deployed systems had been discussed and rejected as a goal fairly
Mark> early in IMPP's existence, for reasons both technical and political.

This matches my own understanding of the apparent rough consensus as
of the last IETF meeting.


OK.  So none of the above is in question and it appears that what I am
asking about was not noticed amidst my own historical rambling.

I took that rough consensus to mean that we are now doing a service
that has end-to-end homogeneity for content.  (To fall back on my
usual references to email:  we are standardizing an equivalent to
RFC822,  but not RFC821, though we ARE also standardizing the core
semantics of a transfer service.)

If this model is not correct, then I do not know why we are making any
normative statements at all about content syntax.


d/
-- 
 Dave <mailto:[email protected]>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
 t +1.408.246.8253; f +1.408.850.1850




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