Re: [Qirg] draft-wang-qirg-quantum-internet-use-cases-05 - Feedback on WG Adoption

Wojciech Kozlowski <> Wed, 06 May 2020 10:11 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 731D83A08AB for <>; Wed, 6 May 2020 03:11:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.786
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.786 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sTNgaFI1NSYI for <>; Wed, 6 May 2020 03:11:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D9863A089D for <>; Wed, 6 May 2020 03:11:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by amavis (Postfix) with ESMTP id D876ECC008E; Wed, 6 May 2020 12:11:28 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 9hv90sQeLQWs; Wed, 6 May 2020 12:11:26 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 148E3CC008A; Wed, 6 May 2020 12:11:26 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P521) id 15.1.1913.5; Wed, 6 May 2020 12:11:19 +0200
Received: from ([fe80::dc7a:a6b8:8bb9:2210]) by ([fe80::dc7a:a6b8:8bb9:2210%13]) with mapi id 15.01.1913.007; Wed, 6 May 2020 12:11:19 +0200
From: Wojciech Kozlowski <>
To: "" <>
CC: "" <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [Qirg] draft-wang-qirg-quantum-internet-use-cases-05 - Feedback on WG Adoption
Thread-Index: AdYOeW1BB943du4wSDuZaWJg1mlbTAOBK+iAAAltxYAAKnVsgAAd85sQARu814AAHm0igAAsfr+AAAd0GAA=
Date: Wed, 6 May 2020 10:11:19 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-GB, nl-NL, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_073304a16e8463d6e0a80a96ffa7e534033d6cd4cameltudelftnl_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Qirg] draft-wang-qirg-quantum-internet-use-cases-05 - Feedback on WG Adoption
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Quantum Internet \(proposed\) RG" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 May 2020 10:11:35 -0000

My original motivation was that my impression is that the QIRG mailing list loses lots of its activity straight after a meeting (lots of people focusing their attention elsewhere). Having a meeting usually helps collect some of that attention. Perhaps this concern is unsubstantiated as presumably it's fairly normal for other WG/RGs.

Thank you for the pointer and the sample e-mail. I will take that on board and I now see it's best to just restart Chonggang's call. Rod and I are happy to proceed with the draft adoption process so now it's just a matter of me working out the details of the process. There will still be a virtual interim as the other draft needs discussing, but if no issues for the use-case draft come up then there's no need to include that in the meeting.


On Wed, 2020-05-06 at 08:37 +0200, Melchior Aelmans wrote:
Hi Wojtek,

No problem of course, I was just asking the question as I'm interested in the motivation.
The Normal process is that the author(s) present his/their draft during the WG meetings and then an adoption call (by the authors or chairs) follows on the list, hence I was wondering why you wanted a meeting to discuss adoption itself.
It is as simple as the email I will post below which has just recently been sent to the MPLS WG mailing list to adopt a draft.

And no worries we are all learning every day :)


Example adoption call email:

Working Group,

This is to start a two week poll on adopting
as a MPLS working group document.

Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working
group mailing list (<>). Please give a technical
motivation for your support/not support, especially if you think that
the document should not be adopted as a working group document.

There is one IPR disclosure against this document.

The authors have stated on the MPLS wg mailing list that they are
unaware of any IPRs that relates to this document.

The working group adoption poll ends May 15, 2020.


On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 11:24 AM Wojciech Kozlowski <<>> wrote:
Hi Melchior,

Current plan is to have another virtual interim where this will be an agenda point. Adoption will be confirmed on the mailing list anyway. It was my mistake in the first place to not leave time for this in the April meeting.

I'm new to this chairing business so I'm consulting with Rod to make sure everything's by the book. Please bear with us :)


On Mon, 2020-05-04 at 20:52 +0200, Melchior Aelmans wrote:
HI team,

Just out of curiosity; why wait with adoption? If there's consensus to do so, preferably on the list so it's documented, then why not adopt? Do the chairs believe the draft is not ready for WG adoption yet?


On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 3:29 AM Chonggang Wang <<>> wrote:
Thanks, Wojtek! We are ok with your suggestion.

From: Wojciech Kozlowski <<>>
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2020 9:10 AM
To:<> <<>>; Chonggang Wang <>
Subject: Re: [Qirg] draft-wang-qirg-quantum-internet-use-cases-05 - Feedback on WG Adoption

See in-line

On Mon, 2020-04-27 at 15:02 +0000, Chonggang Wang wrote:

Hi Wojtek,

Thank you for your email. Please see my responses inline below.

Best regards,


From: Qirg <<>> On Behalf Of Wojciech Kozlowski
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 8:25 AM
Subject: Re: [Qirg] draft-wang-qirg-quantum-internet-use-cases-05 - Feedback on WG Adoption

Hi Chonggang,

Thanks for your work on this draft. The question about adoption is important and there should've been some time left for this question at the virtual interim. It's my fault for packing the agenda too tightly so I do apologise for that.

[CW]: It’s not an issue. I have followed your advice to continue the question through the mailing list and positive feedback about adoption has been received.

There have been voices of support on the mailing list so perhaps we can leave this question until the next meeting (virtual or face-to-face) so it can be discussed properly? We can then make sure it receives the right amount of time on the agenda.

[CW]: It seems IETF/IRTF WG/RG adoption decisions typically can be made on the mailing list.  We presented the draft during the virtual F2F, and there has been substantial discussions on the mailing list (over the last few months) and good support for adoption on the mailing list (over the last few weeks).  So another approach would be to adopt it now (as it has met all the typical adoption criteria in IRTF).  However, we can also wait until the next virtual interim if you feel more presentations and discussions would be useful.  We (as the authors) are good with either approach.

[WK] Yes, can we please wait until the next meeting. My suggestion was motivated by the fact that I'm under the impression that the mailing list gets less attention from the community shortly after a meeting. This tends to pick up again in the run-up to the next meeting. The support indicated on the mailing list is positive and together with Rod we will make sure sufficient time is allocated for this point at the next meeting and the charter definitely indicates a need for a discussion about use cases. This is what I meant that there should've been time at the previous meeting for this. If there won't be a QIRG meeting at IETF 108 (virtual or F2F), we can revisit it on the mailing list then to not delay unnecessarily.



On Thu, 2020-04-09 at 14:22 +0000, Chonggang Wang wrote:

Hi All,

As you know, draft-wang-qirg-quantum-internet-use-cases-05 was presented in yesterday’s interim meeting. We are following chairs’ advice to continue discussion on the mailing list.

This I-D was initiated in Jan 2020. Since then, many valuable inputs have been received from QIRG community and this I-D has been revised for five rounds.  We would like to get and appreciate your feedback on:

Is this I-D ready for WG adoption?

Best regards,




ABI - Streaming Media Report<>

This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or otherwise protected from disclosure to anyone other than its intended recipient. Unintended transmission shall not constitute waiver of any privilege or confidentiality obligation. If you received this communication in error, please do not review, copy or distribute it, notify me immediately by email, and delete the original message and any attachments. Unless expressly stated in this e-mail, nothing in this message or any attachment should be construed as a digital or electronic signature.


Qirg mailing list<><>

Qirg mailing list<><>