Re: [Rfced-future] Issue 144

[Peter Saint-Andre <[e-mail]>]

On 1/6/22 4:46 PM, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
> On 2022-01-07 02:12, Salz, Rich wrote:
>>> I suspect others may feel differently in that they don't want this to 
>>> be subject to changed IETF policies.
>>
>> I’d really like to hear from people who feel this as to what and why. 
>> I was just assuming this is like a WG in its behavior, and perhaps my 
>> assumption is completely wrong.
> 
> I think in this case (advance notice), copy by reference is fine. In 
> others (RSAB mailing list, for example), copy by value may be better, 
> because as already said, the RSAB more like the Nomcom or so than an 
> average IETF WG.

If I'm reading the room correctly, we could say something like this:

###

The RSWG is also empowered to hold in-person or online meetings,
which should be announced with sufficient notice to enable broad
participation; the [IESG Guidance on Face-to-Face and Virtual Interim
Meetings](https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/interim-meetings-guidance-2016-01-16/) 
provides a reasonable baseline.

###

Peter