[Wish] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on charter-ietf-wish-00-01: (with COMMENT)

Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 21 January 2021 09:33 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: wish-chairs@ietf.org, wish@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Éric Vyncke <evyncke@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <161122163206.28761.13627585159068349475@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 01:33:52 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wish/lYjQsnm7z6NYNaz2fheqnULP7aQ>
Subject: [Wish] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on charter-ietf-wish-00-01: (with COMMENT)

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-wish-00-01: 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:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-wish/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Is SDP "Signaling Description Protocol" or "Session Description Protocol" ?

Like Alvaro, I would prefer to drop the commercial company names as they bring
little to the discussion.

Could the background be more concise ?

Will the 'product' of this WG be a single document that is a specification  as
indicated by "The product of this working group will be a specification" ? If
so, could the work be done in another WG ?

We will also need to ensure that this WG is exposed to MOPS WG and vice-versa.

[Wish] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on charter-ietf… Éric Vyncke via Datatracker