Re: [IPsec] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on charter-ietf-ipsecme-11-01: (with COMMENT)

[Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[e-mail]>]

Thanks, Benjamin, for catching this ...

On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 8:30 AM Spencer Dawkins <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for
> charter-ietf-ipsecme-11-01: 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-ipsecme/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I don't object to this proposed charter going for internal review, but do
> have
> one question.
>

I don't object to this proposed charter going for EXTERNAL review, either,
and that's actually what Eric is asking the IESG to ballot on ...

Sorry!

Spencer

When looking at some of the work items, I see
>
> "A possible starting point is draft-yeung-g-ikev2" (nit, missing closing
> period)
>
> "draft-mglt-ipsecme-diet-esp and
> draft-mglt-ipsecme-ikev2-diet-esp-extension
> are expected to be good starting points for ESP compression."
>
> "draft-smyslov-ipsecme-ikev2-compression and
> raft-smyslov-ipsecme-ikev2-compact
> are good starting point for IKEv2 compression." (nit, should be "starting
> points")
>
> "draft-boucadair-ipsecme-ipv6-ipv4-codes could be used as a starting point
> for
> this item."
>
> If you're using different language to convey a nuance, that would be fine
> (I'm
> missing it, but I miss things).
>
> If you're saying the same thing in all four cases, I'd suggest using the
> same
> phrasing in each case. so working group chairs and participants aren't
> trying
> to figure out whether "possible starting point" and "could be used as a
> starting point" are the same as "expected to be good starting points" and
> "are
> good starting points".
>
> I think I see "A possible starting point is" in most charters that point to
> individual drafts, which lets the working group decide whether to adopt
> that
> proposal or work on a different approach, but do the right thing, of
> course.
>
>
>