IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Iot-directorate] IETF107 prep call agenda thoughts

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 26 February 2020 20:39 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: iot-directorate@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iot-directorate@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBDB83A13F2 for <iot-directorate@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 12:39:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JMGKEZk90fRG for <iot-directorate@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 12:39:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F6103A13EC for <iot-directorate@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 12:39:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3250E38982 for <iot-directorate@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 15:37:59 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86F36E72 for <iot-directorate@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 15:39:00 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: IETF IoT Directorate <iot-directorate@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <E5668B56-0295-4E4D-B5A0-A33530744F95@ericsson.com>
References: <E5668B56-0295-4E4D-B5A0-A33530744F95@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 25.1.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 15:39:00 -0500
Message-ID: <10007.1582749540@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iot-directorate/OnPsmuKAVMZ88yp0g2i7nnZuNo0>
Subject: [Iot-directorate] IETF107 prep call agenda thoughts
X-BeenThere: iot-directorate@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mailing list for the IoT Directorate Members <iot-directorate.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/iot-directorate>, <mailto:iot-directorate-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/iot-directorate/>
List-Post: <mailto:iot-directorate@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iot-directorate-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iot-directorate>, <mailto:iot-directorate-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 20:39:03 -0000

Ari, thank you for arranging this call.

With the new, much more open structure, I wonder if updates from WG chairs is
really the best way.

It would be good to emphasize the places where WGs are seeing things arrive
which turn out to be out of their scope, but aren't sure where it goes.
Or, the opposite, where two WGs are convinced something is their business.


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email