Re: [paws] agenda uploaded

Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com> Thu, 01 November 2012 23:06 UTC

Return-Path: <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
X-Original-To: paws@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: paws@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37C1B21F97E9 for <paws@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 16:06:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.984
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.984 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.614, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zoLzIp70U3i7 for <paws@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 16:06:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sabertooth01.qualcomm.com (sabertooth01.qualcomm.com [65.197.215.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B42F121F97E7 for <paws@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 16:06:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6883"; a="3683546"
Received: from ironmsg03-r.qualcomm.com ([172.30.46.17]) by sabertooth01.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 01 Nov 2012 15:52:02 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.80,695,1344236400"; d="scan'208,217"; a="362316958"
Received: from nasanexhc08.na.qualcomm.com ([172.30.39.7]) by Ironmsg03-R.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 01 Nov 2012 16:06:15 -0700
Received: from presnick-mac.wlan.qualcomm.com (172.30.39.5) by qcmail1.qualcomm.com (172.30.39.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.318.1; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 16:06:14 -0700
Message-ID: <50930066.7010301@qti.qualcomm.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:06:14 -0700
From: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100630 Eudora/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Gabor.Bajko@nokia.com
References: <1ECAFF543A2FED4EA2BEB6CACE08E47602073D7A@008-AM1MPN1-007.mgdnok.nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <1ECAFF543A2FED4EA2BEB6CACE08E47602073D7A@008-AM1MPN1-007.mgdnok.nokia.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------000605050104060807060309"
X-Originating-IP: [172.30.39.5]
Cc: paws@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [paws] agenda uploaded
X-BeenThere: paws@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Protocol to Access White Space database \(PAWS\)" <paws.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/paws>, <mailto:paws-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/paws>
List-Post: <mailto:paws@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:paws-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws>, <mailto:paws-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 23:06:25 -0000

On 10/31/12 4:20 PM, Gabor.Bajko@nokia.com wrote:
>
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/85/agenda/agenda-85-paws
>

I have a few issues with this, at least as the final agenda. That agenda 
says:

> PAWS working group meeting - Atlanta (IETF85)
> Thursday - November 8th @ 9am
> =========================================
>
> Administrivia (5 min)
> Blue sheets, minutes taker, jabber
>
> Note Well
>
> Agenda bashing

Sure, the above is fine.

> WG doc status (20 min)

No, this should not be done. We have all read the docs. If the status 
needs to be summarized, post a message to the mailing list. There is no 
need to waste time in the session doing this. Please, let's not have 
this on the agenda.

> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-vchen-paws-protocol-00.txt (Vince, 60min)

This is fine, but I expect the author and the chairs to have a list of 
issues in the document that *can not* be resolved on the list. I do not 
have a problem with compiling that issues list week and not finalizing 
it until the day of (I understand that we all have busy schedules), but 
please try to collect these issues together on the mailing list so if 
people want to talk about any particular issues that are not otherwise 
noted, they will be able to identify them.

> time permitting: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-wu-paws-secutity-00.txt 
> (Yang, 20 min)

I have not seen serious discussion of this document on the list. What is 
the purpose of this agenda item?

Finally, the only feedback I got to my review of the usecases-rqmnts 
document was from Peter Stanforth, but haven't heard anything further. 
If folks aren't yet prepared to discuss this at the f2f, I will 
understand. (My review did come in quite late.) But if people do want to 
discuss it, you should post to the list so that the chairs know what you 
wish to discuss. (I don't expect this to be added to the agenda if there 
isn't more discussion on the list.)

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478