Hi Mike, I don’t disagree with your general reasoning, applied to a normally working WG.
How familiar are you with the inner working and progress of the authorization-related work in ACE since, say, IETF 96, and the role of the chair during this time? (And now I’m not talking about the multicast security discussion, but the fact that that discussion took place actually also fits into the bigger picture.) It is one of the beauties with the IETF is that people can come into the discussion and share their experience, thanks for that. It would be even more helpful if we can focus on the specific issues of this WG. Welcome to bring your terrier into the pit or learn about the mongrels already there. Thanks Göran On 2017-09-28 19:21, "Ace on behalf of Michael StJohns" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >On 9/27/2017 1:29 PM, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: >> Goran has a good point here. > >Actually - I don't think he does. If there is a sufficiently >interested group of people that want to talk certificate enrollment and >there is a chair available and willing then do an interim on that. If >there is a group of sufficiently interested group of people that want to >talk about the roadmap then do an interim on that. If ACE doesn't want >to have such an interim then perhaps it still gets done as a virtual >BOF. But this has as much legitimacy as any of the other ACE work items. > >Virtual interims have another more common name - teleconferences. >They're cheap to hold. > >Don't hold the certificate stuff hostage to the roadmap stuff and don't >confuse a F2F interim with a virtual interim with respect to providing a >false either or choice. > >The IETF is bottom up - we work on what the members are interested in >working on. It's not a great idea holding one idea hostage as a means >of trying to get work done on something else. > >Later, Mike > >> >> Kathleen >> >> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Göran Selander >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> As I mentioned in a previous mail, I’m completely against giving >>>priority >>> to non-charter items. Therefore the first interim meeting should be >>> focused on the ACE roadmap - the output from the Wiki activity. If we >>>have >>> time to discuss certificate enrolment, that is fine. If we want a later >>> interim for the certificate enrolment discussion that is fine too, as >>>long >>> as there is sufficient time is given to decide on the ongoing work. >>> >>> Göran >>> >>> >>> On 2017-09-27 18:34, "Ace on behalf of Hannes Tschofenig" >>> <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Fair enough. >>>> >>>> We either need to make it longer or pick two dates. I prefer the >>>>latter. >>>> >>>> On 09/27/2017 06:23 PM, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: >>>>> Sure, my response was to make it clear the wiki was to be discussed >>>>> though. Will this all be on one call or two? The announcement >>>>>wasn't >>>>> clear and I'd like ot make sure the WG is ready for the profiles >>>>> discussion. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Kathleen >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Hannes Tschofenig >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> I agree with Kepeng that we also wanted to discuss the certificate >>>>>> enrollment in addition to the Wiki. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 09/27/2017 05:23 PM, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: >>>>>>> Hello Kepeng, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The interim should also be to discuss the profiles as that was a >>>>>>> priority from the WG session in Prague. Goran pulled together the >>>>>>> wiki, now it's up to the WG participants to check the wiki and >>>>>>>amend >>>>>>> as needed to allow for a productive session. Or did you plan on >>>>>>>two >>>>>>> interims? Timing is tight for that though. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>> Kathleen >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 9:44 PM, Kepeng Li >>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> According to our IETF 99 meeting minutes, we will hold an interim >>>>>>>> meeting on >>>>>>>> certificate enrolment in constrained environments. >>>>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/99/materials/minutes-99-ace/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We proposed three options for the meeting time: >>>>>>>> 1. 17th Oct, Tuesday, GMT 13:00 ~ 14:00. >>>>>>>> 2. 18th Oct, Wednesday, GMT 13:00 ~ 14:00. >>>>>>>> 3. 19th Oct, Thursday, GMT 13:00 ~ 14:00. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please indicate your available time from the doodle poll: >>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/ig3bhr7tfb2xh4u4 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hannes and I will prepare the agenda and send out later. We may >>>>>>>>add >>>>>>>> other >>>>>>>> topics to the agenda. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Kind Regards >>>>>>>> Kepeng & Hannes >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Ace mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >Ace mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace _______________________________________________ Ace mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
