[dhcwg] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on charter-ietf-dhc-08-00: (with COMMENT)

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Thu, 22 February 2018 04:19 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: dhc-chairs@ietf.org, dhcwg@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <151927317277.21157.7378336004452013171.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 20:19:32 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/JkuBN8sUpuAr8rm2jKYngs2voDs>
Subject: [dhcwg] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on charter-ietf-dhc-08-00: (with COMMENT)

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-dhc-08-00: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)



The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-dhc/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The bit about independent submissions seems out of place in a WG charter. If
it's the expectation is that a bunch of options are likely to be defined in the
independent stream and guidance will be sought from the WG, that raises a
question about why they aren't being published through the WG in the first
place.

I would also be curious to learn what practicalities are motivating the move to
full standard.

[dhcwg] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on charter-i… Alissa Cooper