Re: [Mops] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on charter-ietf-mops-00-01: (with COMMENT)

[Alvaro Retana <[e-mail]>]

On October 16, 2019 at 2:22:54 PM, Deen, Glenn (NBCUniversal) (
[e-mail]) wrote:

Glenn:

Hi!


----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

"Where new protocols are needed, MOPS will identify appropriate venues for
their development."

It doesn't seem to be this WGs call to decide where to do new work. As
mentioned later in the charter, existing areas/groups already have
responsibility in related spaces. It should then be up to the relevant
WGs...ADs...the IESG...to determine where new work will take place (if at
all).

Given the next to last paragraph...

... Media operational and deployment issues with specific protocols or
technologies...

I think that the sentence above is not needed and may lead do confusion.

[GD] With MOPS being focused on Media operations means it will see input,
often in a not ready for other WG to see form. The collective knowledge in
MOPS would in turn hone/develop that into something better rounded out
which in turn would be submitted to either existing WGs or to AD/IESG as
appropriate for the situation. The lawyers call such ideas - inchoate.
MOPS's to turn inchoate media focused ideas in to something more complete
and fleshed out and ready for other groups to take a look at them.

MOPS would not be deciding the venue for the new work, but would play a
role in bringing it to the attention of the appropriate venue.

Would this new working be better?:

"Where new protocols are needed, MOPS will flesh out the nascent need and
raise to the attention of the appropriate parties (AD/IESG)"

Yes, that would be better.

Thanks!=

Alvaro.