Subject: Re: [fmc] List Description

From: Hasnaa Moustafa <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 16:33:24 +0200

Hi,

I agree that we need to start by explaining the motivation and
use-cases  then do a list of requirements and see what needs to be
done at the ietf (which is not done in other SDOs) to satisfy these
requirements.

So, I do not know Behcet,  what would be the shape of the progress
under this topic.
- update the problem statement? or split the problem statement into
several topics (motivation/use-cases, requirements, what exists
outside the ietf and what's missing?

Regards,
Hassnaa

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>,
<[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 12:15:32 +0200
Subject: Re: [fmc] List description
Hi,

I definitely agree we should elaborate first on requirements from an
"FMC" standpoint. And I'd add "from and IETF standpoint" also...

Before talking about solutions, I think we should try to get consensus
on a list of clear requirements with their Motivation/use-case.

Then, we could talk about solutions and go to a gap analysis, with
respect to work done in other WG (or SDOs), to see what protocol
extensions are needed.

Pierrick