Re: [arch-d] Invite to webex side meeting 03/25, 8:00 AM on "New IP Architecture and Protocols".

Stephen,

1) Wrt to side-meeting announcement:
In a similar way as you had planned for a side-meeting for Chirp,
we had planned an inofficial side meeting to offer discussing this
drafts topic until corona hit. So we just tried to set up a a virtual
inofficial side meeting as good as possible without any IETF
online collaboration tool support for such inofficial side meetings.

2) Wrt to discussion on a list vs. side meeting:
A lot of new -00 work to the IETF is first brought in front of a fitting
in-person IETF audience before being dicussed at length on lists, especially
when its not incremental work. In our case, this work was predated by
the IETF106 inofficial side meeting, after which we started to write
down the -00 draft and tried to find the best community to discuss this
with. Everybody told us to use architecture-discuss@ief.org.

3) Wrt to architecture-discuss@ietf.org being an IAB activity:
https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss
""The architecture-discuss list serves as a technical discussion forum for
all members of the IETF community that are interested in larger
architectural issues. ... ""
I do not see IAB being mentioned in the text at all. Maybe you want
to refine that text if the list is assumed to be subject to specific
IAB regulations not described yet. I would hope it is not, because
the current scope definition is IMHO very good.

4) Wrt. ICS invite "cheeky to cast .. sort-of official"
I think its clear now, that this ICS was a tragic accident by a third
party. I specifically DID NOT include an ICS because it clearly would be
too invasive on a list like architecture-discuss!! I can also not remember
(maybe i am wrong) that this list is used for official IAB
announcements / meeting invites either.

5) Wrt. "a bit more style"
Always happy to improve my collaboration style.
Let me know what is missing given above explanations.

Cheers
    Toerless

On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 11:03:42PM +0000, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> 
> Hmm,
> 
> On 20/03/2020 22:38, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> > We suggest to direct followup discussions to
> > architcture-discuss@ietf.org if you think it is of interest to the
> > IETF.
> AFAIK this is basically an initiative driven by one or
> a small set of vendors. It is not an IAB activity and
> this list is. ISTM somewhat cheeky to cast this as if
> it were sort-of "official" by sending ICS invites to
> this list and suggesting this list be used for follow
> ups. I'm saying that as an individual and have not
> asked other IAB folks what they think, but again
> speaking personally, I'd be much happier if people
> and organisations had a bit more style.
> 
> S.

pub   RSA 4096/7B172BEA 2017-12-22 Stephen Farrell (2017) <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
> sub   RSA 4096/36CB8BB6 2017-12-22
> 