Hi all, I like the idea:-)
Best, /ck > On 17. Oct 2019, at 17:27, Brian Trammell (RIPE) <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Greetings, all, > > We ran out of time today to discuss the proposal I alluded to at the > beginning of the meeting, so I'm taking it to the mailing list: > > I would propose that we make the role of MAT WG in providing information and > advice to the RIPE NCC's tools teams more explicit. In this proposal, > [email protected] mailing would be considered a primary channel for proposals > for features for RIPE Atlas. These proposals would then be discussed on the > list and/or during MAT WG meetings, and once the discussion on converges, the > outcome passed to the RIPE NCC tools team as advice. This would turn the > current process, where the tools team disseminates updates about current work > and future plans, into a two way street. > > While I propose that this should be more explicit, I am not proposing that > this be made more formal: this would not use the PDP, and would not be in any > way binding on the NCC. > > What do you, the WG, think? > > Thanks, cheers, > > Brian (as MAT-WG co-chair)
