On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Benoit Claise <[email protected]> wrote: > On 5/9/2017 4:56 PM, Warren Kumari wrote: > > Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-i2nsf-problem-and-use-cases-15: 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.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2nsf-problem-and-use-cases/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I found the document to provide a useful overview and introduction - I > think that documents which provide an introduction to a technology are > useful, as they set the stage for users and implementers to understand > how everything ties together. > > I thank the authors for writing it. > > I also note that this is part of the I2NSF charter, and was written to > satisfy this. > > Indeed. > We clarified the situation of "support documents" with this IESG statement: > https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/support-documents-in-ietf-wgs.html, > dated Nov 2016. > The statement contains this key sentence IMO: > > As regards to timing, it would be worthwhile to discuss the need to publish > support documents early during the charter development process in order to > set the right expectations and minimize surprises at a late stage. > > The authors produced the charter deliverables. Thanks for that. > Once a deliverable is in an existing charter, I don't really understand the > meaning of abstaining. > The IESG statement should take effect for future charter discussions, not > past charters.
Agreed. I also find support documents helpful and think that following the statement is best as that's the guidance we have provided to the community. In the case of this document, the editors did spend time resolving comments and changed it to an informational draft, so that will hopefully help a few people who abstained previously. With that said, we'll talk about this at the retreat more as people were very supportive of a recent overview document, but are not supportive of use case documents. If this is a distinction we expect to continue, we should provide this guidance to working groups before they charter. Best regards, Kathleen > > Regards, Benoit > > > _______________________________________________ > I2nsf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf > . > > > > _______________________________________________ > I2nsf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf > -- Best regards, Kathleen _______________________________________________ I2nsf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
