Re: [Mops] [EXTERNAL] Re: Barry Leiba's Block on charter-ietf-mops-00-00: (with BLOCK and COMMENT)

Will do. Expect an update early next week.

Glenn 

> On Oct 4, 2019, at 5:33 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyncke@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> Barry
> 
> Thank for your review and your valuable comments as always.
> 
> You are right that it is not so easy to have a charter for a "standing working group" which is the first (?) attempt by the IETF community to have something resembling to a "special interest group".
> 
> On your two specific BLOCKs, I will let the current chairs to rewrite your first concern and indeed adding new work items will require a re-charter in the current state of the IETF. So, let's be clear on it for now (and initiate some works on "special interest groups")
> 
> Thank you also for your comments/nits: they will improve the text.
> 
> Leslie and Glen, may I suggest to update accordingly the draft charter ? And if the MOPS list agrees with it, then upload it ? (if you do not have the permission, then simply send it to me)
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -éric
> 
> On 03/10/2019, 22:19, "iesg on behalf of Barry Leiba via Datatracker" <iesg-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
>    Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
>    charter-ietf-mops-00-00: Block
> 
>    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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-mops/__;!c3kmrbLBmhXtig!5BgHQHr9Zc5Q9vHSaNt_0ncGyrUMFeURqTX0qDujfsUxlDV71WRpxa8uek0P96Er$ 
> 
> 
> 
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>    BLOCK:
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>    In general, I'm not terribly happy with how this charter lays out specific work
>    items (or doesn't).  It's very vague, and then when I look to the milestones I
>    get more of an understanding.  On the one hand, this is OK, because we want
>    this to be flexible, as a standing working group.  On the other hand, I would
>    feel better with being somewhat more specific.  And I realize that this isn't
>    terribly actionable, so I'm asking that we think about this, and I won't hold
>    this "block" beyond our doing some reasonable consideration.
> 
>    I do have two specific blocking comments, both of which should be easy to sort
>    out:
> 
>       The premise of MOPS is that continued development of Internet-using
>       technologies should be properly coordinated in order to ensure that the
>       existing technologies are well-utilized, and new ones are developed in
>       sympathy with the Internet’s core protocols and design.
> 
>    This sounds like a lot of fuzz without real substance.  Let’s try to tease out
>    what its really saying and word it more accessibly.  At some level this seems
>    to be saying that the premise of MOPS is that what the IETF does is good.  I’m
>    sure there’s more meant here than that, but I don’t understand what.
> 
>       Future work items within this scope will be adopted by the Working Group only
>       if there is a substantial expression of interest from the community and if
>       the work clearly does not fit elsewhere in the IETF.
> 
>    And only with a re-chartering, yes?  I don’t think we want the working group to
>    be able to pick up *any* related work it chooses, just because it doesn’t fit
>    elsewhere, right?
> 
> 
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>    COMMENT:
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>    And then there are a number of editorial things:
> 
>       MOPS’ focus is on
>       identifying areas where existing protocols and/or networks are challenged
> 
>    I suggest avoiding the issue of how to make a possessive of “MOPS” (I would use
>    “MOPS’s”) by saying “The focus of MOPS is….”
> 
>       MOPS will solicit input on operational issues and practices, existing and
>       proposed technologies related to the deployment, engineering, and operation
>       of media streaming and manipulation protocols and procedures in the global
>       Internet, inter-domain and single domain networking.
> 
>    Because the second list item has commas in it, you need the main list to use
>    semicolons.  Otherwise it’s impossible to be sure one has parsed it accurately.
> 
>    NEW
>       MOPS will solicit input on operational issues and practices; existing and
>       proposed technologies related to the deployment, engineering, and operation
>       of media streaming and manipulation protocols and procedures in the global
>       Internet; and inter-domain and single-domain networking.
>    END
> 
>       In this case, media is considered to include
> 
>    “In this case” seems odd here.  I think you mean, “In the context of this
>    charter,” or something like that.
> 
>       MOPS acts as a clearinghouse to
>       identify appropriate venues for further protocol development, where
>       necessary.
> 
>    I’d rather be more direct in how this is worded (adjust as needed):
> 
>    NEW
>       Where new protocols are needed, MOPS will identify appropriate venues for
>       their development.
>    END
> 
>    Bullet 3 needs a period at the end.  And what “resulting innovations” are we
>    talking about here?  It sounds like more fuzz, so can we be more specific?
> 
>       including global Internet, inter-domain and within-domain operations.
> 
>    Earlier, you used “single-domain”, and here you use “within-domain”; please be
>    consistent.
> 
>       There must be a continuous expression of interest for the Working Group to
>       work on a particular work item.
> 
>    I think you mean “continuing”.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Mops mailing list
> Mops@ietf.org
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops__;!c3kmrbLBmhXtig!5BgHQHr9Zc5Q9vHSaNt_0ncGyrUMFeURqTX0qDujfsUxlDV71WRpxa8ueoXyVNR8$ 