On October 6, 2022 at 12:55:28 PM, Dino Farinacci wrote:
Hi! > > I think that is the place to say that we will also work on relevant > > Informational and Experimental work. > > I definitely agree with this statement. This version of the charter is basically the same as the current charter -- minus the multicast work item, plus some wordsmithing. I don't see much value in going through the rechartering process without significant changes to the charter. IOW, if the work items are the same then let's just keep working! :-) Joel's full proposal was: > Second, the first part of the charter says we will only work on standards > track documents. I think that is the place to say that we will also work on > relevant Informational and Experimental work. Probably with some verbiage > that says Informational would be drafts which talk about how to use the LISP > tools, and Experimental would be for things which need further evaluation > (success or failure of the experiment) that add to the LISP protocol suite. Instead of opening the charter to "relevant" things, I rather include a known list. Note that even if the intent is to work on Standards Track documents the WG may decide later that a specific (listed) work item requires further evaluation and make it Experimental. We don't need the charter to say that. So...are there specific work items that (a) talk about how to use LISP, or (b) should be added to the list (where the status can be determined later), or (c) should be taken off the list? Thanks! Alvaro. _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
