[radext] Re: [iesg] Re: Roman Danyliw's Block on charter-ietf-radext-07-03: (with BLOCK)

[Valery Smyslov <[e-mail]>]

Hi,


> > [Roman] The WG has deep understanding into the ecosystem, but I don't understand the hole in the IETF
> process that this text is targeting, especially if this is intended to provide notice of code point registrations coming
> from outside of the IETF.
> 
>   As background, one of the reasons for a charter update is a number of RADIUS drafts which originate in other
> standards bodies.  Without a charter update, the WG is unable to move forward with these topics.
> 
>   The result is that there are standards in other SDOs which are blocked on RADEXT charter updates.
> 
>   So if any text in the charter is controversial or unexpected, it's likely best to just remove it.  I think that's the last
> "block", so hopefully the charter can be updated before Vienna.

I strongly agree with Alan. Currently, a number of documents intended to be adopted by RADEXT WG are
blocked waiting for the end of the re-chartering process. The sooner it is resolved, the sooner the WG can start working on them.

Roman, by no means the new charter was targeting to create a hole in the IETF process.
The only intention was to allow drafts created outside the IETF to be adopted, and thus, passed
the control over these drafts to the IETF, with all due IETF process. If you can propose better 
wording, it would be great (and we have already incorporated your proposed changes to the charter
from your previous Block). Or we can just remove the text as Alan proposed if it is a stumbling block here.

Regards,
Valery.

[...]

>   Alan DeKok.