It seems that we are in violent agreement that we want to have the capability to report 'intended' usage, and not 'actual usage'. Pete mentioned, that the charter update text containing 'intended' usage was submitted to the iesg, and will be discussed on May 24th. Pete does not see problems with the text which would prevent it being approved, so let's proceed with the assumption that it will be approved.
With that, I think we can close the discussion on the scope of the WG, everyone should have by now a good understanding of what's in the scope and what's not. - Gabor From: ext Peter Stanforth [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 5:15 AM To: Bajko Gabor (Nokia-CIC/SiliconValley); [email protected] Subject: Charter update progress Before Gabor threatens to shoot me let me repeat our position on this charter update. Spectrum Bridge is very much in favor of feedback loops. If I was my decision to make I would go for devices reporting expected channel use in response to a channel list. If the group prefers a "channels used" report in the next channel request we would support that. We would even support both, assuming they were equal (both mandatory or both optional). What we are trying to avoid at this time is a real time recurring "channel in use" update. This is a huge burden. We may end up there in the future, but if we do I want to be very certain that we know why and what that means. Peter S.
_______________________________________________ paws mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
