An example of an informational document that I was trying to allow for
is the Nexagon work.
As a lesser matter, I was also trying to allow for the WG deciding that
some piece of technical work was harder than we thought and needed to be
experimented with first.
Yours,
Joel
On 10/6/2022 7:30 PM, Alvaro Retana wrote:
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
