Hi Toerless,
On 11/3/16 8:54 PM, Toerless Eckert wrote: > On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 10:18:06PM +0100, Eliot Lear wrote: >> Hi Brian, >> >> Before we start imagining what the requirements in such situations are, >> are they at all written somewhere? Otherwise we run the risk of >> inventing a lot of mechanism to deal with a non-existent use case. > Not being Brian, but you being encumbered with more IETF/IAB > background, let me bring up the point that during anima formation, > our AD(s) where not too happy to delay progress in anima by > "requirements" documents or the much. Sure, and I don't think we should. > > - not sure if/how this might have changed > - written requireemnts from other WGs would be nice instead > of us (anima) having to come up with them > - Wasn't/isn't there some form of work in IETF bout emergency > or the like (911)... drawing a blank here, but maybe those > folks have requirements to draw from. The ECRIT WG did some work, and indeed that is where I went to look at some of this stuff. But I think they were quite focused on E911-type solutions and didn't go further. Eliot
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list Anima@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
