What Jeff said. Roman, if you’ll take a marker for an update that covers this document, ex post facto, I'll commit to handling that as part of the charter update Jeff mentions.
—John > On Oct 16, 2024, at 10:24 AM, Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> wrote: > > Roman, > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 06:24:10AM -0700, Roman Danyliw via Datatracker wrote: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> DISCUSS: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> (For the BFD WG chairs and responsible AD) This document does not appear to >> be >> in scope of the charter (version -08). The current charter identifies 7 >> specific topics (numbers 1, 2a, 2b, 2c, 3, 4, and 5), none of which appear to >> cover this document. > > We also completed work on a YANG module, approved by the IESG, that wasn't > in charter. > > BFD work is being done outside of the BFD working group by various protocol > extensions. Are those drafts chartered? > > More directly, it's known that charters are stale. Is this *really* the > point you want to use as a DISCUSS and will an audit of things you've > approved show that you've consistently applied that evaluation criteria? > > I suggest you reconsider the position filed as a COMMENT. > > As already discussed (lower-case d) with the routing area directors, BFD is > largely wrapping up the few pieces of lingering work it's doing. The > decision is not to shut down the group, but to hibernate it. A charter > update as part of that is appropriate. > > -- Jeff >
