That is fine.

When BGP was deleted and 'global routing network' replaced it, it looked
like a broadening of the scope.  If the BGP context is added near the top
of the charter, then it is more clear.

Deb

On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 11:11 AM Ketan Talaulikar <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi Deb,
>
> I don't see a scope creep here - this has been more of a cleanup and
> bringing things up to date. There was some work done which was not captured
> (now added) and some things that were in current charter but not the WG
> focus (now removed). The collaboration mode with other WGs (especially IDR)
> has been clarified.
>
> I don't expect any confusion in the WG that their focus is on BGP :-)
>
> That said, as similar comments have been made by a few people now, it does
> seem appropriate to set the BGP context in the charter text (perhaps right
> at the top as was suggested?). I will leave this to Med.
>
> Thanks,
> Ketan
>
>
> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 8:22 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Deb,
>>
>> Please see inline.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Med
>>
>> > -----Message d'origine-----
>> > De : Deb Cooley via Datatracker <[email protected]>
>> > Envoyé : mercredi 7 mai 2025 15:21
>> > À : The IESG <[email protected]>
>> > Cc : [email protected]; [email protected]
>> > Objet : Deb Cooley's No Objection on charter-ietf-grow-04-05: (with
>> > COMMENT)
>> >
>> > Deb Cooley has entered the following ballot position for
>> > charter-ietf-grow-04-05: No Objection
>> >
>> > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to
>> > all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to
>> > cut this introductory paragraph, however.)
>> >
>> >
>> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > COMMENT:
>> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > My previous comment:
>> > 'In 2009, the starting paragraph focused on BGP, is that different
>> > now?  Is GROW still focused on BGP operational challenges?  Or has
>> > that focus expanded?
>>
>> [Med] It is still focused on BGP as this is the only inter-domain routing
>> protocol used in operations.
>>
>> > Has that scope creep been agreed with other working groups?'
>> >
>>
>> [Med] ACK. The charter was shared with rtg ADs and reviewed in particular
>> by Ketan (who is responsible AD of IDR where BGP is specified).
>>
>> > This along with Gunter's comment, this resulted in a single
>> > addition of 'BGP'
>>
>> [Med] hmm. I guess you confused it with the comment from Éric. The text
>> agreed with Gunter can be seen at:
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/grow/Onf6-WBXqrL4Gy3YpFI2VnkpYIE/
>>
>> > in one location down in the objectives section.  If 'the global
>> > (IP) routing network' is a euphemism for BGP, then that needs to be
>> > explained up at the top of the charter.
>> >
>>
>> [Med] Will see how to mention it. Thanks.
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
>> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
>> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez
>> recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
>> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages
>> electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
>> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme
>> ou falsifie. Merci.
>>
>> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged
>> information that may be protected by law;
>> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
>> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and
>> delete this message and its attachments.
>> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have
>> been modified, changed or falsified.
>> Thank you.
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to