Subject: RE: draft-ietf-pana-usage-scenarios-00.txt

From: "Hesham Soliman (ERA)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 13:24:45 +0100

> 
  > 1. The requirements should only cover what is in scope.
  > 2. You say that the usage scenarious will cover things that 
  > are not in scope.
  > 3. And you claim that the requirements must cover all the 
  > scenarious.
  > 
  > All 3 of the above can not be true since they are in 
  > logical conflict.
  > Thus at least one of them must not be true. Which one is it?
  > 

=> I think we should make sure that 2) is not true.
The usage scenario draft should stay within scope.

Hesham

---

From: Yoshihiro Ohba <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 09:02:04 -0500

> The usage scenario draft should stay within scope.

Hmm, I think 3) is not true.  The requirements must cover all the 
*in-scope* parts of the scenarious.

If (2) is not true, the partial charge-free service scenario, the /64
prefix access control sceanario, and intra-domain inter-techonology
handoff scenario would need to be removed.  That would not be so
useful, I strongly believe.

> Hesham

Yoshihiro Ohba