Ketan, > On May 21, 2020, at 8:12 PM, Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) > <ketant=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > > Hi Brian, > > Please see my previous response to your comments. > > My argument is not legalistic. I am not as experience in IETF work as you and > Bob are. But what I understand is that the reason why we have these "legal" > process of charters and BoF is to enable a proper technical discussion with > the right context and details of the proposal presented for review of the > community. > > I do not see how shortcutting them helps anyone and I wonder why it is being > done in this case?
There is no short cutting here. The adoption call is to determine if there is interest in the w.g. to take this work into 6man. If it becomes a w.g. draft, then the w.g. is responsible to decide what happens next. It’s a first step, it is not a decision to publish it. Bob (w/ w.g. chair hat on) > > Thanks, > Ketan > > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> > Sent: 22 May 2020 04:18 > To: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) <ket...@cisco.com>; Ron Bonica > <rbon...@juniper.net>; Chengli (Cheng Li) <c...@huawei.com>; Zafar Ali (zali) > <z...@cisco.com>; Robert Raszuk <rob...@raszuk.net> > Cc: spring@ietf.org; 6man <6...@ietf.org> > Subject: Re: CRH is back to the SPRING Use-Case - Re: Size of CR in CRH > > On 22-May-20 05:26, Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) wrote: > ...> It is the 6man charter that precludes it from defining a new Source > Routing solution.. >> “It is not chartered to develop major changes or additions to the IPv6 >> specifications.” > > If this addition was major, that would be true. But adding a new RH type is > well within the scope of maintenance, IMHO. We have already done it quite > recently. > > In any case, legalistic arguments about WG charters are really not how we > should take technical decisions. > > Regards > Brian > > > _______________________________________________ > spring mailing list > spring@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
