[Raw] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on charter-ietf-raw-00-00: (with COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 22 January 2020 19:51 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: raw@ietf.org
Delivered-To: raw@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89DD112089B; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 11:51:00 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: raw-chairs@ietf.org, raw@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.116.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
Message-ID: <157972266048.12320.3799679905954952023.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 11:51:00 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/raw/1QK3OdoPAjaXVvuppa5GYC_yKBg>
Subject: [Raw] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on charter-ietf-raw-00-00: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: raw@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: reliable and available wireless <raw.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/raw>, <mailto:raw-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/raw/>
List-Post: <mailto:raw@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:raw-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/raw>, <mailto:raw-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 19:51:01 -0000

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-raw-00-00: 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:


+1 on Alvaro Retana’s feedback.

To the question of how will the WG know they covered all of the use cases, are
the “newer industrial applications” referenced in “The RAW Working Group is
planned to … quickly address these newer industry applications”: (a)
“Aeronautical Data Communications” or (b) “IEEE Std. 802.15.4 timeslotted
channel hopping (TSCH), 3GPP 5G ultra-reliable low latency communications
(URLLC), IEEE 802.11ax/be, and L-band Digital Aeronautical Communications
System (LDACS)”?

(Not my area) Is it possible to be clearer on the purpose of the draft
artifacts? If the need for new “solution work” is unclear, then why is there
certainty that more supporting documents are needed?