Re: [Pce] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on charter-ietf-pce-07-03: (with COMMENT)

[Dhruv Dhody <[e-mail]>]

Hi Éric,

Thanks for your review.

On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 6:28 PM Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
> charter-ietf-pce-07-03: 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-pce/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Like Martin, I suggest adding some text around collaboration with the
> CATS WG.
>
>
Dhruv: This is what I replied to Martin regarding any CATS work -

There is a possibility in future for it but as of now there is no work
> proposed nor it is listed in the CATS charter.


The WG also discussed this point at
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/kxt-R3J7hONnxaDya1EMcEyLcC8/ and
we concluded to leave that for a future recharter if/when the need arrives.

May I also suggest adding that all work items have an intended status of
> "standards track"
>
>
>
Dhruv: By default, all protocol extensions are meant to be "standards
track". However WG has produced informational documents when there is a
need for a separate applicability statement or a requirement document in
the past. I would like to leave the charter text as it is. Note that the
Milestones have the intended status.

Thanks!
Dhruv