Re: [Dots] merging requirements and use cases drafts?

Hi Andrew,

Thanks for raising this on list.  inline.

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 1:42 PM, Mortensen, Andrew <amortensen@arbor.net> wrote:
> During the interim meeting, Kathleen Moriarty observed that it might be beneficial to merge the requirements and use cases drafts, since the IESG tends to look more favorably on such drafts.
>
> We did not continue that discussion during the interim meeting, due to limited time, but I think it’s something we need to discuss ahead of the meeting in Chicago. To begin with, I’d like to hear a little more from Kathleen about why a merged draft is likely to be more palatable to the IESG. If nothing else, it’d be nice to avoid coming to the topic cold in Chicago.

If the WG would like to publish both the use case document and the
requirements (which is fine to do), it might take less work cycles for
IETF review, IESG review, and document processing if it were combined
into one document.  On the other hand, if the WG decides that they
don't need to publish the documents formally, that the expired drafts
are enough, that's also fine.  Here is the IESG statement on these
types of support documents, hence my comment on the call:

https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/support-documents-in-ietf-wgs.html

Thanks.
>
> andrew
> _______________________________________________
> Dots mailing list
> Dots@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots

-- 

Best regards,
Kathleen