Re: [sidr] Poll: WG acceptance of draft-ymbk-rpki-grandparenting-02

On Dec 12, 2012, at 2:56 PM, Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> wrote:

> Dear WG participants,
> 
> I would like to initiate 2+ weeks poll (ending on December 31st 2012) regarding acceptance of draft-ymbk-rpki-grandparenting-02.txt. Please reply to questions listed below. Send your replies to the mailing list or directly to WG chairs <sidr-chairs@tools.ietf.org>. I would like to avoid extended discussions of technical issues at this time, as I think people already made up their minds. However including pointers to earlier discussions is fine.
> 
> Alexey,
> on behald of SIDR chairs.
> 
> ----------------
> 
> 1) Is the problem described/solved by draft-ymbk-rpki-grandparenting-02 actually a problem that the WG needs to address? (Answer: yes or no. Additional information is welcomed, but I don't want people to repeat the whole discussion.)

Yes, it is a problem that I believe the WG should address….
I don't think it is the most important issue on our plate but I do think it is worth addressing.

> 2) If you answered "yes" to the question #1, please also answer the following question:
> 
> Is draft-ymbk-rpki-grandparenting-02 a reasonable starting point to become a WG document? Please choose one of the following:
> 
> 
> a) Ready for Adoption (whether or not you have some specific issues with it. Also, this answer is unrelated to whether this should be a separate draft or a part of an existing draft).

A. I believe that 1: starting from somewhere is useful (and this is somewhere) and 2: once the WG owns the doc it can make whatever changes it wants (well, is able to reach consensus on :-P)

> 
> b) Needs more work BEFORE Adoption
> 
> c) Should not be adopted. In particular this mean that you don't believe any amount of work on the proposed draft will address your issues. So any solution to this problem should be a new draft written from scratch.
> 
> d) Abstain/don't care
> 
> 
> 3) If you answered "a" or "b" above, please also answer the following question:
> 
> Does this need to be in a standalone draft, or can it be incorporated into another existing WG draft? When answering this question please only base your answer on technical reasons, in particular please leave the decision on who is going to edit the document (if it is standalone) to WG chairs.

What? There is no "Abstain/don't care" option for 3? ;-)

W

> _______________________________________________
> sidr mailing list
> sidr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
> 

-- 
"Does Emacs have the Buddha nature? Why not? It has bloody well everything else..."