Re: [radext] Rechartering RADEXT

[Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>]

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.
>