Subject: RE: [Enum] Revised Charter and Work Plan for ENUM WG

From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 07:04:31 -0400

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Patrik Fältström [mailto:[email-masked]]
>Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 1:51 AM
>To: Richard Shockey; [email-masked]
>Subject: Re: [Enum] Revised Charter and Work Plan for ENUM WG
>
>
>The steps forward are as follows:
>
>(1) If you have comments on this proposed charter, please send comments to
>this mailing list. I doubt that Richard and myself managed to word
>everything so perfectly that you don't have any comments... ;-)

A general question: some of the work items may be seen by some as getting
close to operational, implementation, or policy areas.  What kind of
boundaries can be agreed upon to ensure that the WG is clearly focused on
engineering issues without getting drawn into non-engineering ratholes?

>(2) If you have strawman proposals for documents which fit the descriptions
>seen on the new charter, please forward to myself and Richard, so we can
>approve them as wg documents. This so discussion on the work items can be
>initiated.

I've written a draft that describes a possible provisioning mechanism:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-01.txt

Please consider this document as a contribution.

Sorry you won't be able to make SLC.

-Scott-

_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum

---

From: Patrik Fältström <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 18:55:38 +0200

--On 2001-10-15 07.04 -0400 "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
wrote:

>> (1) If you have comments on this proposed charter, please send comments
>> to this mailing list. I doubt that Richard and myself managed to word

The more technical and less policy, the better. The more the technical
suggestions allow different policy mechanisms the better.

  paf