Re: [Raw] Alissa Cooper's Block on charter-ietf-raw-00-02: (with BLOCK)

"Venkatesan, Ganesh" <> Wed, 05 February 2020 17:00 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0ED0120877; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 09:00:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CCk9KxU_-HUL; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 09:00:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4488D120870; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 09:00:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message)
X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Feb 2020 09:00:01 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,406,1574150400"; d="scan'208";a="264285620"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 05 Feb 2020 09:00:01 -0800
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 09:00:00 -0800
From: "Venkatesan, Ganesh" <>
To: "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A" <>, Alissa Cooper <>
CC: "" <>, "" <>, The IESG <>
Thread-Topic: [Raw] Alissa Cooper's Block on charter-ietf-raw-00-02: (with BLOCK)
Thread-Index: AQHV26On7Z5d6TScpEWey+kVaHO/vKgNV0uA//98NUA=
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 16:59:59 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
dlp-product: dlpe-windows
dlp-reaction: no-action
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Raw] Alissa Cooper's Block on charter-ietf-raw-00-02: (with BLOCK)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: reliable and available wireless <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2020 17:00:06 -0000

Hello All:
>> Some of these applications already are existing with proprietary solutions.

Is this something that we want to encourage? I would think that standardized solutions are far better from the perspective of interoperability and enablement of new markets.

Cheers --
“It is amazing what you can accomplish if you don’t care who gets the credit.” – Harry Truman

-----Original Message-----
From: Raw <> On Behalf Of BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2020 8:49 AM
To: Alissa Cooper <>
Cc:;; The IESG <>
Subject: Re: [Raw] Alissa Cooper's Block on charter-ietf-raw-00-02: (with BLOCK)

Hi Alissa,

Please refer to Pascal’s reply for background.

I didn’t intend to scope this to only aeronautical applications. I was only trying to point to it as one of the critical. As the use cases are under discussion, I didn’t want at this time to give “the answer”. The use case document has more information.

As you and Alvaro are looking for more detail, would this sentence added to the end of the second paragraph help?

“Other example wireless applications include Industrial, Pro Audio and Video, Gaming, and Edge Robotics.”

The intention of why this is not scoped specifically to aeronautical is because the hope is to find a common solution for multiple applications similar to the detnet, teas, and ccamp approach.

On your second part questioning which is first - applications or use cases- I’m not sure the confusion. Some of these applications already are existing with proprietary solutions. Others as Pascal noted are waiting for technology improvements. Can you provide suggested rewording to help us understand?

Thanks for your interest!

> On Feb 4, 2020, at 4:40 PM, Alissa Cooper via Datatracker <> wrote:
> Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
> charter-ietf-raw-00-02: Block
> 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:
> org_doc_charter-2Dietf-2Draw_&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6UhG
> pW9lwi9dM7jYlxXD8w&m=502tSGOqoismvYiL8leAR3QQnD4BL_k8zLb-AfTcfEo&s=ugP
> n41aRiN67TWEyT9eFhIzEILnyFFm_cKV5BmDYGBU&e=
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> I still feel that the charter is unclear on the relationship between 
> "Aeronautical Data Applications" and the work of this WG. The charter 
> says this is "one" critical application, but then uses the term "these 
> newly identified industry applications" and "these newer industry 
> applications." Do those snippets of text refer to multiple different 
> aeronautical applications? Or do they refer to applications in other 
> domains? Since the aeronautical applications are called out multiple 
> times, are they expected to take precedence over other applications 
> when the use cases and requirements are defined?
> Also, this is a little pedantic but since there has been a lot of 
> confusion about this, I think it needs to be clarified: the charter 
> says "RAW’s focus will be on identifying use cases and requirements for these new applications."
> Wouldn't we expect applications to flow from use cases, not the other 
> way around? That is, if the WG intends to invent use cases for 
> applications that already exist, that seems backwards.
> --
> Raw mailing list
> man_listinfo_raw&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6UhGpW9lwi9dM7jYl
> xXD8w&m=502tSGOqoismvYiL8leAR3QQnD4BL_k8zLb-AfTcfEo&s=5MVQbSJo0RLpCObZ
> kYE9G-SwrJB44e4uVsdyMi-ZdWc&e=
Raw mailing list