Re: [rmcat] confirmation of WG adoption calls

["Eggert, Lars" <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

Mirja and me have gotten zero feedback on the two points below. Therefore:

On Mar 11, 2013, at 21:03, "Eggert, Lars" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> (1) draft-jesup-rmcat-reqs as a starting point for our cc-requirements work item
> (2) draft-singh-rmcat-cc-eval as a starting point for our eval-criteria work item
> 
> For (1), the room as 20-0 in favor of adoption. I'd call this strong consensus and would as the author to submit the next revision as a WG item. Please speak up if you disagree with this notion.

Randell, please submit the next revision (which should incorporate the feedback from Orlando) as a WG item named draft-ietf-rmcat-cc-requirements-00 (bringing the name in line with the milestone tags we use on http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/rmcat/trac/wiki/RearrangedCharter for easier tracking).

> For (2), the room was more split, with about 10-5 in favor. I'd like to understand the reservations that kept some people from supporting the consensus call. Please send a brief email to the list (or to the chairs personally) and let us know if you have fundamental objections or would simply see the document develop a bit further before being able to support it, or any other concerns you may have.
> 
> We don't have any alternative documents targeting our eval-criteria milestone, and I'm thus at the moment leaning to call a weak consensus for adoption. But I want to make sure we understand the concerns first.

Not having seen any feedback, I'm calling rough consensus to adopt (2) towards our eval-criteria milestone as well. The consensus is quite a bit rougher than for (1), but I believe the document is good enough as a starting point, and Varun is actively working with the WG in order to develop the draft. And, we don't seem to have any other document attempting to target this milestone.

So, Varun, please submit the next revision as draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-criteria-00, again bringing the name in line with the milestone tags we use on the wiki. Please incorporate the discussions of the design team as well (and continue discussing!)

Thanks,
Lars