On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Papadimitriou, Dimitri (Dimitri) 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
 wrote:
Hi,
As we are discussing it; it would be of interest to see if this working group 
should not consider as part of its charter “extensions” for protocols for which 
there is no dedicated working group anymore (other areas have similar working 
groups e.g. TCPm)

I think that falls into work that doesn't fit in another WG.  If it is small, 
then this charter lets RTGWG pick it up.
If it's big, then rechartering would be necessary.

Alia

===
Thanks Alia for clarifying this and I agree with you stated.
This is important as there could be small work items where things are specific 
interest to routing and quite critical in deployments (example security 
aspects, as KARP is closed now).
In those matters guidance from WG as well as specific suggestions from RTGWG 
chairs will be quite helpful.

$0.02
--
Uma C.


_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

Reply via email to