Hi Chairs, Thanks for initiating this call for the feedback!
I support the creation of a new WG and will participate and contribute to it. A dedicated home to reach a rough consensus on the scope of the problem and framework is necessary to make progress. I see that there are still some concerns that have been expressed on the list, but IMHO the chances of resolving them in a dedicated WG are higher as we drive towards consensus. I agree that the scope of the WG and the charter would need to be well crafted. Thanks! Dhruv On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 10:45 PM Jeff Tantsura <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear RTGWG, > > > > > > APN has been presented at RTGWG multiple times, and we see the evolution > of the > > documents, including the scope of the problem and framework. This topic > needs > > collaboration across WGs; we can foresee that not all issues to be > addressed are > > within the charter of RTGWG and would span beyond the Routing area. > > > > RTGWG is chartered to provide a venue for new work, there are a couple of > different options and one option for handling > > such new work would be to recommend the development of a new WG. > > The Chairs would then want to recommend that the ADs consider forming a > focus WG, with a set of well defined deliverables and milestones (after > delivery the group would be shut down) to work on a framework for APN. > > > > We would like to solicit the WG for opinions. Please note that comments > about > > existing APN documents should be sent to [email protected]. This thread > focuses on > > support or objection to recommending that the ADs consider the formation > of a > > new WG. > > > > Please send your comments, support, or objectiond. > > Thanks! > > > > > > Cheers, > > Yingzhen Jeff > > > _______________________________________________ > rtgwg mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg >
_______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
