[Sframe] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on charter-ietf-sframe-00-02: (with COMMENT)

Alvaro Retana via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 04 November 2020 19:41 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: sframe@ietf.org
Delivered-To: sframe@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 751ED3A0FEB; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 11:41:29 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Alvaro Retana via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: sframe-chairs@ietf.org, sframe@ietf.org, dispatch@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.21.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <160451888939.14817.13295583498248182378@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2020 11:41:29 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sframe/mfaPpuCo2iEfA6W8OdYtpEAXQyM>
Subject: [Sframe] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on charter-ietf-sframe-00-02: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: sframe@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: <sframe.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sframe>, <mailto:sframe-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sframe/>
List-Post: <mailto:sframe@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sframe-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sframe>, <mailto:sframe-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2020 19:41:30 -0000

Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-sframe-00-02: 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:


It's not clear to me what exactly this last piece of text means:

   Input to the WG

   Proposals already existing relating to this charter proposal:

It is just a pointer to existing work?  Is it a statement that the WG should
use (or maybe will use) this document as the base for discussion?  Given that
the document was the source of the discussion that led to this WG, I assume
it's the latter.  Please be clear.