Re: [radext] Rechartering RADEXT

Actually Jim did already do an awesome review!

Sent from my iPad

> On 18 mrt. 2014, at 20:00, Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Point taken. I'm hoping for clarification requests coming from the WG.
> My issue with AD sponsor documents is to get good reviews. Believe it or no, it's not easy.
> A chartered document requires some reviews.
> 
> Regards, Benoit
>> How would you expect the WG to change a document that has the purpose of
>> documenting one version of a RADIUS deployment.  While I think that asking
>> the group to review the document for readability makes sense, having the
>> document as a WG item does not.
>> 
>> Jim
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: radext [mailto:radext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Benoit Claise
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:34 AM
>>> To: Jouni Korhonen; radext@ietf.org
>>> Cc: radext-chairs@tools.ietf.org
>>> Subject: Re: [radext] Rechartering RADEXT
>>> 
>>> Dear all,
>>> 
>>> I've been asked in the past to AD sponsor
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wierenga-ietf-eduroam/
>>> I always prefer to get proper WG review when possible...
>>> Therefore I'm more inclined to have this document part of the new RADEXT
>>> charter.
>>> 
>>> Do you see any problems with this approach?
>>> 
>>> Regards, Benoit
>>>> Folks,
>>>> 
>>>> We are about to recharter soon, since the current charter work items are
>>> nearly done.
>>>> We got the CoA Proxying as a potential charter item. So, the question
>>>> is whether the WG is OK taking in the work in and at the same time
>>>> adding required words  into the current charter.
>>>> 
>>>> During the London WG meeting we had a presentation of
>>>> draft-cheng-behave-cgn-cfg-radius-ext
>>>> I-D. Surprisingly many people had read it and there was also interest
>>>> around the ongoing work. So, the question is whether the WG is OK
>>>> taking in the work in and at the same time adding required words  into
>>>> the current charter. In general I would (personally) like to add text
>> into the
>>> charter allowing RADEXT take in similar work to this more easily.
>>>> Any other topics the WG feels need to be added into the charter? I'd
>>>> assume at least Alan has one or two in his sleeves ;)
>>>> 
>>>> - Jouni & Stefan.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> radext mailing list
>>> radext@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext
>> .
> 
> _______________________________________________
> radext mailing list
> radext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext