RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D?ch

> Which is the preferred working group is a worthwhile discussion to 
> continue.

I think the charters pretty much settle that question (?)....

> The other item worth discussing is the goal of the work item.  This is 
> important because it helps guide the action items to the point that the 
> wg knows when it is done.  We know that you have proposed a BCP for 
> network convergence that will not include Methodology.  Your focus is "to 
> provide guidance to testers".  How will this be achieved?  What will be 
> covered? How would we know when it is done?

Provide guidance to developers and users of tests relating to the 
convergence of routing protocols, to be more specific. Which narrows the 
scope enough to answer a lot of your questions.... This isn't a "wide open" 
space we're dealing with, it's a very narrow space, actually, and something 
I would consider very important.

The sentence above gives the scope and the draft, and it also sums up how 
we'd know we are finished--when the WG comes to concensus about the 
completeness of the draft (as we would with any other draft).

> BTW, A lot of the questions being asked with this thread are typically 
> covered in a Working Group Proposal.  Maybe it would be beneficial to 
> complete that for this proposed work item.

I don't recall doing one for the OSPF benchmarking drafts--maybe you should 
send me the one you did for draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-meth-03.txt, 
so I could use it as an example.

Russ

__________________________________
riw@cisco.com CCIE <>< Grace Alone

_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
bmwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg