Oh spit. A rather silly typo below...
On 10-Feb-22 09:08, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
On 10-Feb-22 08:35, Michael Richardson wrote:
I have read:
draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-11
The RSWG seems like it isn't an IESG WG, nor is it an IAB Program.
It seems like it is a new flavour of thing. But, I think that it won't
really need any special bits in the datatracker, it could like any other WG?
I wonder if the letters "WG" might be replaced with something else.
That was debated at length in the Program (for this effort *was* an
IBM Program).
Um, no. It was a IAB Program
Brian
The consensus was to stick with WG because we intend it
to operate very much in the manner of an IETF WG, even though it
isn't one.
It seems that the IAB could appoint the IETF Chair (an IAB member) to the
RSAB, and the IESG could also appoint the IETF Chair. I think this unlikely,
and I don't propose to add any rules, but I noticed that.
Is draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model the first document in the Editorial Stream?
It needs to be in the IAB Stream really, to bootstrap the new stream, IMHO.
I have read:
draft-rosen-rfcefdp-update-2026-01
could it be shorter?
I have read:
draft-carpenter-rfced-iab-charter-05
is it shorter than the previous one?
I tried to make it as short as I could...
Brian
In summary, I have no problem with any of these documents.
They will look good, and I'm glad that this is done.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
