[lmap] way forward (after IETF 96)
"Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com> Wed, 20 July 2016 09:33 UTC
Return-Path: <dromasca@avaya.com>
X-Original-To: lmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7708C12D0A5 for <lmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 02:33:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.186
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.186 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287] 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 zHVUmY94D7vG for <lmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 02:33:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com (p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com [135.11.29.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B63EE12D13E for <lmap@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 02:33:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A2FSAgDhRI9X/xUHmMZdHoJTIS1WfAa2W4IPgXoihXgCgS44FAEBAQEBAQEDYhwLglEiFxABAQEBAQFPAj4xAQISG14BFRVWJgEEGxqIDgENn3WFE5hCAQoBAQEeBYYriBRbAQEdgkcLWIIvBZkmAZBNh32FUIZfiUEeNoNzbgGGOjYBfgEBAQ
X-IPAS-Result: A2FSAgDhRI9X/xUHmMZdHoJTIS1WfAa2W4IPgXoihXgCgS44FAEBAQEBAQEDYhwLglEiFxABAQEBAQFPAj4xAQISG14BFRVWJgEEGxqIDgENn3WFE5hCAQoBAQEeBYYriBRbAQEdgkcLWIIvBZkmAZBNh32FUIZfiUEeNoNzbgGGOjYBfgEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,393,1464667200"; d="scan'208,217";a="196942770"
Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest-exch.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.21]) by p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 20 Jul 2016 05:32:27 -0400
X-OutboundMail_SMTP: 1
Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-FFEXHC02.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.58.12]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 20 Jul 2016 05:32:27 -0400
Received: from AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com ([fe80::6db7:b0af:8480:c126]) by AZ-FFEXHC02.global.avaya.com ([135.64.58.12]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 11:32:26 +0200
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: "lmap@ietf.org" <lmap@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: way forward (after IETF 96)
Thread-Index: AdHiaZ/a/sJ9ytL0TOyROH/S6B+TOQ==
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 09:32:25 +0000
Message-ID: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA75242378@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.64.58.47]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA75242378AZFFEXMB04globa_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lmap/9ioL1FUGkedp3j6JnEvj7BuL4KM>
Subject: [lmap] way forward (after IETF 96)
X-BeenThere: lmap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Large Scale Measurement of Access network Performance <lmap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lmap>, <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lmap/>
List-Post: <mailto:lmap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lmap>, <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 09:33:09 -0000
Hi, I have uploaded the chairs slides for the LMAP WG meeting at https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/96/slides/slides-96-lmap-0.pdf. The last slide includes a 'Way Forward' straw-man proposal that includes what needs to be done before IETF 96 and 97. It reads right now like this: * Complete WGLC - 7/31 * Update documents - 8/31 * 2 weeks WGLC - 9/15 * Virtual Interim meeting (if needed) - 9/15 - 9/30 * Submit updated documents to the IESG - 10/15 * Discuss re-chartering or concluding - start now * Meet at IETF 97 - only if not finished, or new work proposals get traction on the WG mail list As you can see we are approaching the conclusion of the current charter. Our AD asked us to think about what next. We basically have two options. Conclude the WG and let the implementations and deployment bring feedback on what is good, what is bad and what is missing. Or, revisit the different proposals for future work that have been made in the last 2-3 years. I suggest that we start discussing this at the end of the meeting on Friday, and continue the discussion on the mail list. Regards, Dan
- [lmap] way forward (after IETF 96) Romascanu, Dan (Dan)