[Bier] In reply to the formal complaints

[Martin Vigoureux <[e-mail]>]

WG

First, I'd like to apologize for the time this has taken.

I have reviewed the two formal complaints that were sent early March, 
and I have also reviewed most of the e-mails that were sent on the bier 
mailing list for the past 12 months or so, relating to BIER and IPv6.

I will not individually discuss the various points raised, rather I will 
make a general statement.

It is my opinion that a certain number of points are not critical (in 
the sense of not needing an AD to step-in) and some typically happen 
sometimes as part of the life cycle of WGs. Yet, I do recognize that 
some points are more problematic than others.
Further, it is my opinion that the points listed may arise from a 
variety of intentions and as such it is hazardous to associate them with 
a particular one.
It is however my opinion that the multiplicity of concerns is, in 
itself, a concern.
I have talked with the chairs. They do recognize that, at some 
occasions, their communication was not the most effective one, and I 
trust they will pay attention to that in the future.

About the adoption poll on draft-zhang-bier-bierin6. Although the way 
this was handled raised some concerns, I'd like to remind that an 
adoption poll is not formally part of our processes, even if it is 
common practice, and in fact it only marks the start of the WG 
discussion. As such, I have little arguments to go back on this.

The last part is about the progress of a so-called BIER v6 solution. 
Here, I have asked the chairs to establish a summary of the discussions 
regarding that type of solution in general and regarding the specific 
document which proposes a solution. They should publish it some time 
after this e-mail.

Following that, it is my expectation that the WG has a fair and open 
discussion, ideally focussing on the general aspects, and then concludes 
on the way forward.


Martin