[Sframe] Intended DISPATCH outcome / charter
Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx> Tue, 21 July 2020 20:46 UTC
Return-Path: <rlb@ipv.sx>
X-Original-To: sframe@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sframe@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43F8B3A0A66 for <sframe@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 13:46:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ipv-sx.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7pEPjjxo5Hrc for <sframe@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 13:46:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qv1-xf2f.google.com (mail-qv1-xf2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f2f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF9B43A0A68 for <sframe@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 13:46:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qv1-xf2f.google.com with SMTP id m8so71567qvk.7 for <sframe@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 13:46:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ipv-sx.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=wx8fuLf7VRGpZZRDApR9vMT6AYTxg2uqXn9scHsRoL0=; b=zTVOoe3e2bBR2qaF9UNqIQ9gTX+f5rXvpfPON5LmgYsTtI1hLxgXhQ2bwzUbIGmuhQ Yf/+6h6ZhOHSLI1VsxjPg1+rcg/o9cR8Ss6dg9spMT3tmDt44QbTB8DrCnFQD4O3gbRu LbQ61Gg8Khc1oGL/sHBrzuQZrp2XsaD9ugKGpH43tLT8rNpKBnB9UDKlJekLL5Ivph4E MLOLf9f4faSVKYH4GV7M1EFDQorS2bogd7pVcGe+unYAVol73jKftfHOORlGpQd3p0Wx EfKUM6KBnGile23VsW4SVshrYAWFANQ7jbp0f4OIn3yZ6C/6b14qvv7r7MTIp6Hdc89I faXg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=wx8fuLf7VRGpZZRDApR9vMT6AYTxg2uqXn9scHsRoL0=; b=KFzwyrhd+hEmYuW4MQVrEY/pGDJ2ykbexUbocB0FTXElhuXz2Hv0lYTCP3Znwz6WRs UY10sn7QkV4qf7sXHm2G2Tkv96nETwCGC92a8Yi4qteKtKav9W7rzMvg8i4g9apwn5JC /5J/Y/49Jv7XIT7MGeCmBF7icjfbQDNfCjl2KHlElcS0gnoPauez7cawBSejH//TcmdM LOHGoFQxE6Cs+lLXhwexU8IXCpfZXT8xChJBYtn5B+hsI4sgI3Woj6HegAL+9br9Y4C6 MbCF1+sVNx9MNi4n2IU9W7ER97Eg0AfiR2tcyb4TSoAFJdfJRyllzRgdxkNnyQtrB9eQ EknQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533ZxiWAdiYKmw4Hc5zNYxY2mAPIKZhDdhqg89XAp2eaf0Z2uGgC emW5Gg6n6lRsMjIIle7Dxucw1GLAO6kU83KsnBGiobe+GhDdFQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxXJjFGwpvLqMTR/ju/qFvLyMoX+jFHEUMr9Mz2XTwThloCAG789TRh/qaVFUwaqFQin63K0eXzTECs2u9LrAc=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:1584:: with SMTP id m4mr27160070qvw.60.1595364413408; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 13:46:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:46:27 -0400
Message-ID: <CAL02cgTNad12T8a0V9E5ca6Y7tJYK6-=_c4j1LLiaCM9-DF-=g@mail.gmail.com>
To: sframe@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002645d905aaf9b93c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sframe/s0xEyfgwkqwhcufcPAesdJQTkO8>
Subject: [Sframe] Intended DISPATCH outcome / charter
X-BeenThere: sframe@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
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: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:46:56 -0000
Hey all, I see that SFrame is on the DISPATCH agenda. Great idea, thanks to whomever arranged that. In my experience, DISPATCH proposals have gone more smoothly when they've had a proposed resolution in mind. Recall that the DISPATCH outcomes are roughly: 0. Do nothing 1. Existing working group 2. AD sponsorship 3. New WG My inclination is that this work is probably about the right size for its own small, focused working group. Toward that goal, I've gone ahead and sketched a charter for the WG here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/10rG8nAR0U6cBBPffzXnLaPPYL4uzxYViAvgiSezoa7o/edit?usp=sharing I think that captures everything I think is important to get done here. But please feel free to comment there (or here) if you think the scope is wrong. Cheers, --Richard
- [Sframe] Intended DISPATCH outcome / charter Richard Barnes
- Re: [Sframe] Intended DISPATCH outcome / charter Alexandre GOUAILLARD
- Re: [Sframe] Intended DISPATCH outcome / charter Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [Sframe] Intended DISPATCH outcome / charter Richard Barnes
- Re: [Sframe] Intended DISPATCH outcome / charter Richard Barnes
- Re: [Sframe] Intended DISPATCH outcome / charter Emad Omara
- Re: [Sframe] Intended DISPATCH outcome / charter Alexandre GOUAILLARD
- Re: [Sframe] Intended DISPATCH outcome / charter Magnus Westerlund