Re: [trill] Should we make draft-mrw-trill-over-ip-01 a WG document?

On May 15, 2012, at 6:30 AM 5/15/12, Thomas Narten wrote:

> Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> None of these arguments matter as our Area Director says that we need
>> to re-Charter to make TRILL over IP a WG draft. However, I will
>> respond a bit below:
> 
> Then let us please have that discussion and recharter. IMO, it is
> close to ludicrous for "TRILL over Foo" documents to be out-of-scope
> for this WG, if that is indeed what you are saying.
> 
> One could argue that the WG needs to finish its core documents
> first. Or that it needs to get deploy experience first, etc., etc. Or
> that specific FOO is not needed. But having work on
> draft-mrw-trill-over-ip being done outside of the WG because its
> generally out-of-scope for TRILL would be broken, IMO.

draft-mrw-trill-over-ip is not out of scope, it's just not on the current list of deliverables for the working group.  The core charter of the working group is still OK but the list of deliverables is more than a year old.  Some have been completed, some have seen some progress but are late, some have not been addressed at all.  It's appropriate for the WG to revisit the list of deliverables, decide what documents are core and revise the charter appropriately.

- Ralph

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