Subject: [e2md] List of Objections

From: Bernie Hoeneisen <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 11:37:13 +0200 (CEST)

Hi e2md folks!

During the conference call earlier this week, we agreed to collect a list 
of objections raised against the e2md proposal.

(This list will include real as well as perceived issues. Lateron we will 
take them appart, but now it is important that we have a complete 'List of 
Objections' as we need to thoroughly understand the perceived, the L9+ 
and the FUD issues too.)

I started this task using the e2md Trac/WiKi. (I mainly broke down the BoF 
minutes and fed them to tracker tickets. I also made intial assumptions on 
the severity.)

Please find the current list of objections on:

   http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/e2md/trac/report/10
   (I suggest your to bookmark this URL as a starting point.)

To add new objections you are aware of, simply create a 'New Ticket'.
You can also add your comments to existing tickets/objections.

Note: For any additions/changes, you need to login. You can use your
       existing IETF login or, if your don't have one yet, just use the
       'Create Account' function. In an unlikely case of problems, just
       drop me an email and I'll take care of it.

Looking forward to your contributions to our 'List of Objections'!

cheers,
  Bernie

-- 

http://ucom.ch/
Tech Consulting for Internet Standardization

---

From: "Cartwright, Kenneth" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 14:11:36 -0400

...there was to be a call today at 2pm.  Not so?

This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may
contain confidential and privileged information of Transaction Network Services.
Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you
are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.

---

From: Jay Daley <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 06:14:26 +1200

Same here.

On 14/04/2010, at 6:11 AM, Cartwright, Kenneth wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> e2md mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/e2md

-- 
Jay Daley
Chief Executive
.nz Registry Services (New Zealand Domain Name Registry Limited)
desk: +64 4 931 6977
mobile: +64 21 678840

---

From: Bernie Hoeneisen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 21:02:21 +0200 (CEST)

I do not recall a conf call being agreed for today. Have a missed anything?

---

From: "Cartwright, Kenneth" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:03:44 -0400

At the end of the last call, someone said "same time next week" and a few people said "yes".  Oh well.  No biggie.

Ken

---

From: Dean Willis <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 19:08:14 -0400

Dunno. I am on a work site in the USVI with limited access this week.
-- 
Dean Willis

---

From: Hadriel Kaplan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 19:16:44 -0400

Sorry, I didn't think there was one today either - someone said we needed an agenda, and no one has proposed one.  I'm willing to provide a conf bridge for whatever, but the only agenda item I wanted, which prompted me to ask for a call originally, was to discuss Jay's alternative to source-uri.  I'm specifically NOT volunteering to be the leader of it. :)

Shall we hash out an agenda list and have a call next Tuesday, same time?

-hadriel

> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
> Cartwright, Kenneth
> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 3:04 PM
> To: Bernie Hoeneisen

---

From: Jay Daley <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 13:27:01 +1200

> Shall we hash out an agenda list and have a call next Tuesday, same time?

I will be in a different timezone (EST) but unfortunately in a meeting all day and so unable to join.  Week after?

regards
Jay

---

From: Bernie Hoeneisen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:35:03 +0200 (CEST)

Hi,

If no one else wants the token, I'll continue with the coordination of 
the e2md group. Let's try to find a 1h-slot next week.

(Jay, as you are the most crusial for scheduling, could you please mail me 
your availabilities at times (in UT) when PST and CEST folks are not 
sleeping for the next 2 weeks or so? I'll then set up a Doodle trying to 
fit you in.)

Proposed Agenda:

1) Opening / Roll Call

2) Discussion of the objections (Tracker):
       http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/e2md/trac/report/10
    (Please enter your comments and missing objections you are aware of
    directly to the tracker in advance.)

    Goal: Find a common understanding on what the objections are and
          priorize those.

3) Discussion of the requirements (WiKi):
      http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/e2md/trac/wiki/RequirementsList
    (Please enter your additions, change proposals and missing requirements
    directly to the WiKi in advance.)

    Goal: Get a common understanding on what requirements we are addressing
          and in which timeframe.

4) How to proceed with the e2md work?
    Below a non-exhaustive list of alternatives:

    a) Request 2nd (and last) e2md BoF for IETF-78 (Maastricht)

    b) Have a BarBoF during IETF-78 and go for IETF-79 (Beijing)
       with the 2nd (real) BoF

    c1) Divide and conquer, i.e. something along the lines of
          http://ucom.ch/ietf/e2md-disc/divide_and_conquer.pdf

    c2) Declare the short term solution (c1) of the e2md work as
        "ENUM-Extension" and find a venue for carrying out the work
        (e.g. AD sponsored, re-charter of some existing WG, or whatsoever)

    d) Carry out the work elsewhere (e.g. AD sponsored, within
       an existing WG, completely new BoF proposal, or whatever comes
       to your mind...)

    e) Other Alternatives in sight? Please mail them to the list!

    Goal: Work on a decision on our way forward.

Please send your comments about this proposal to the list!

cheers,
  Bernie

On Tue, 13 Apr 2010, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:

>
> Sorry, I didn't think there was one today either - someone said we 
> needed an agenda, and no one has proposed one.  I'm willing to provide a 
> conf bridge for whatever, but the only agenda item I wanted, which 
> prompted me to ask for a call originally, was to discuss Jay's 
> alternative to source-uri.  I'm specifically NOT volunteering to be the 
> leader of it. :)
>