John Scudder has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-lisp-04-04: Block
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.) The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-lisp/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- BLOCK: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm a little concerned about the unbounded scope the proposed charter gives the working group. I am balloting BLOCK until we have a chance to discuss this: "The LISP WG is chartered to continue work on the LISP protocol, including extensions for which the working group has consensus on deeming them necessary". It's very hard for me to imagine anything at all that would be out of scope according to that criterion, and that tells me the proposed charter should be made more specific. A first question to think about might be "necessary according to what metric or criterion?" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "LISP technology has a wide span of potential applications beyond simple routing." As Martin pointed out, this statement on its own doesn't seem to add anything. To the extent there is something concrete here, doesn't the final bullet capture it? _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
