Re: [MLS] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on charter-ietf-mls-01-00: (with COMMENT)

[Sean Turner <[e-mail]>]

> On Jan 2, 2024, at 08:21, Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
> charter-ietf-mls-01-00: 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-mls/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> To be honest, I was about to ballot a BLOCK based on the absence of intended
> status for the work items in the charter itself.

Sorry I kept you in suspense there until the very end!

> May I also suggest to reduce the leading part of the charter about the history
> and achievements of the MLS WG?

This whole charter change could boil down to “And now, we are going to do some extensions” :). During discussions the WG seems happy (or at least ambivalent) about the amount of pre-amble. Since I never like surprising the IESG, I (I suggested the first draft of the text) opted to follow the approach of change as little as possible so then they can’t object to it; hence, I deleted one lengthy paragraph and changed the tense on some verbs.

What the WG participants really cared about (rightly so) was whether their extension was either in the list or was at least agreed to be in the scope of the list.

Cheers,
spt