Re: ip-dvb BoF ?

[Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>]

Gorry,

> > Discussions amongst a group of people (originally from PILC, but now
> > broadening to people from DVB and ETSI discussion lists) have been looking
> > at evolution of a new standard for transmission of IP datagrams over
> > Digital Video Broadcast (DVB) networks.  Now is an important time, since
> > DVB is used as the bearer network for many satellite Internet services,
> > and there is increasing interests in also providing IP services as a
> > core part of many non-satellite DVB services.  The current standard
> > mechanism for doing this is to use "MPE", which owes much to the world
> > of MPEG, and seems rather suboptimal for IP, and doesn't provide
> > all the features to build a full IP service.
> > 
> > There is a growing awareness of the need to develop a new standard
> > - and the is to do a much better job. One good way to do this would
> > be within the IETF where there is much experience of building
> > ip-over-foo standards.  I was (could still be?) hoping to ask for the
> > possibility of organising a BoF at the next IETF to debate this.

Time is very rapidly running out...

> > With this in mind, we formed a mailing list (ip-dvb@erg.abdn.ac.uk)
> > and have approached the DVB standards body to ask whether
> > they would collaborate / "bless" such an activity. At this time, I am
> > still awaiting their comments....

My general approach to handling BOFs is that I'd like:

1) assuming a WG is what is desired, a rough idea of what the  charter
   of the WG would be. I.e., what would the WG do?

   http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gorry/ip-dvb/charter.html would
   appear to be the first cut.

2) an Internet Draft outlining what needs to be done (what are the
   technical issues). This may provide background information too.

3) establishment of a mailing list used to discuss the draft and
   demonstrate that there is interest in the IETF taking on some
   work. The purpose of the list would be to see where there is
   agreement and where there is not. The BOF (if it were held) would
   try to focus on the issues where there wasn't agreement. Finally,
   it would be used to gauge interest in holding a BOF in the first
   place.

   How many folks are on this list? How widely advertised has it been?
   Should it existance be advertised elsewhere?

All this has to happen  before November 19 (in two weeks). That is the
dealine for the ADs to approve a request.

Also, do you know if enough of the key  players will be able to travel
to Utah in December?

Thomas