Re: [Status] SPRING Charter

[Stewart Bryant <[e-mail]>]

On 16/10/2013 13:47, Alvaro Retana (aretana) wrote:
> On 10/15/13 3:46 PM, "Thomas Narten" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Thomas:
>
> Hi!
>
>> Also, this item:
>>
>>>   Definition of requirements and/or any new data plane
>>>     encodings and procedures, required to implement
>>>     the use cases. Such procedures must include the
>>>     necessary security considerations.
>> Suggests to me that SPRING is being given the go ahead to define IPv6
>> mechanisms to do SR. IMO, any IPv6 protocol work should be done in
>> 6MAN. SPRING should do requirements, etc., but IMO IPv6 protocol work
>> needs to be done where the IPv6 expertise is. Or at the very least
>> with very close coordination.
> The charter also reads:
>
> "Any modification of or extension to existing architectures,
> data planes, or control or management plane protocols
> must be carried out in the working groups responsible
> for the architecture, data plane, or control or
> management plane protocol being modified and in
> co-ordination with this working group, but may be
> done in this working group after agreement with
> all the relevant WG chairs and responsible Area Directors."
>
> So I think we're in agreement.
>
Yes, but it looks like the deliverables text is slight out of
alignment - hence my proposed slight tweek

s/and\/or/for/

Stewart