To my knowledge the Content Alliance/Peering work hasn't had any such
review to date, and I think that it's vital we have some
discussion before
any decision is made. I agree with Mark [Nottingham] that at first glance
it seems
confusing that there's a proposal for a separate group and would find it
useful - purely from a WREC management perspective - on why that proposal
was made.
I think we have been consistently agnostic on the issue of where CDN peering
belongs, as long as the work gets done by a group that is focused on doing
it. Our initial BOF request was to the IESG as a whole, largely because
there was some doubt as to whether CDN peering was more sensibly handled as
part of Applications, Operations, Routing, or Internet.
On the smaller question of relationship with WREC specifically, again I
don't think that there is much of an "Alliance position." Personally, I
think it would be fine for the IESG to put the CDN peering work into WREC,
subject to two constraints:
1) I wouldn't want for the CDN peering work to be a small fraction of a
larger agenda; WREC's rechartering, if it happens in this way, should be
squarely focused on CDN peering as its primary deliverable.
2) I would want to give the IETF community as a whole a chance for a
thumbs-up/thumbs-down on the work, as a BOF does, rather than somehow
sneaking CDN peering into an existing WG. I agree that the WREC charter
arguably encompasses CDN peering already, but I doubt that the IETF had that
specifically in mind at the point when WREC was initially chartered. So I
would argue for treating the rechartering as a BOF-like event.
Both of these have more to do with establishing the conditions for success
in a CDN peering effort than they have to do with the history of WREC. I
understand that WREC has had some travails in the past, but I don't have any
opinion about whether those have impaired its ability to be successful in
the future. I have heard multiple people express concern about WREC's
ability to be a productive forum, but I am not in a position to judge; I
believe the ADs will have a better perspective on that than I have.
--Mark (current chair, Content Peering working group of the Content
Alliance)
Mark Stuart Day
Senior Scientist
Cisco Systems
+1 (781) 663-8310
markday(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com