Re: [Roll] Request for Comments for ROLL Charter

Hi,

Pascal, about this:

"I think it is time to work on compressing RPL DIOs and DAOs as well,
wouldn’t you say?" - Very nice would be to have some work on that :-)

Would it be inside of this proposed work item: "Additional protocol
elements to reduce packet size and the amount of required routing states"?.
I think it agrees what Michael suggested.

Additionally, about milestones/work-items:

"...Every WG has milestones that the WG is
   supposed to meet, such as the publication of a particular Internet-
   Draft or the beginning of discussion on a particular topic.  A WG's
   charter has several parts; one of those parts is the milestones.
   Changing milestones currently requires Area Director (AD) approval,
   but changing the charter text requires IESG approval.....
   ...
 ...While most milestones map one-to-one with Internet-Drafts,
   some milestones do not map to any Internet-Draft (such as those that
   say when a general discussion will begin or finish), and other
   milestones map to multiple Internet-Drafts (such as a milestone that
   covers a topic that has multiple related Internet-Drafts).  Some
   Internet-Drafts are part of more than one milestone." [RFC 6433]

In here:

"...Goals and milestones
      The working group charter MUST establish a timetable for specific
      work items.  While this may be renegotiated over time, the list of
      milestones and dates facilitates the Area Director's tracking of
      working group progress and status, and it is indispensable to
      potential participants identifying the critical moments for input.
      Milestones shall consist of deliverables that can be qualified as
      showing specific achievement; e.g., "Internet-Draft finished" is
      fine, but "discuss via email" is not. It is helpful to specify
      milestones for every 3-6 months, so that progress can be gauged
      easily.  This milestone list is expected to be updated
      periodically..." [RFC 2418] -- I understand here that milestones and
work items are the same.

Cheers,

Ines.

2016-07-07 10:21 GMT+03:00 peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl>:

> We seem to be in agreement.
> I just wanted to emphasize that when detailed concrete subjects with
> associated draft turn up, we make this clear in the milestones.
> Which means that the list of subjects can be more general.
> And indeed, not everything we have in mind needs a milestone now.
>
> I was not thinking about IESG approval procedures.
>
> Peter
>
> Michael Richardson schreef op 2016-07-06 20:02:
>
> peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>     >> To me, it just fits into the maintenance of the specification.  We
>>     >> don't need to list every single thing unless there will be a
>> series of
>>     >> milestones associated with the work.
>>
>>
>>     > I sympathize with Michael's remark.  Is there an associated
>> milestone
>>     > before June 2017?  The idea is to have a limited set of concrete
>>     > subjects with corresponding realistic milestones
>>
>> I'm not sure if I'm answering your ? or just emphasizing the point...
>>
>> I said: "series of milestones" here.
>>
>> If we are taking on work that is more than a single document, then I
>> think we
>> need IESG and charter support.  If it's just a single document, and it
>> shows
>> up, then when we adopt it, we insert a milestone.
>>
>> --
>> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>