There is a draft cut-off date posted by the IETF secretariat. If you submit a draft and ask that it should be CC:ed to a certain WG it will (see recent discussion on the ietf mailinglist). Once that is done, I will also try and make a list and post it here. If someone feel that I have forgotten about them I am sure I will be told..:)th proposals that have been made formally I meant submitted to the
IETF. That is enough. I will try and go out and ask the authors of what
I can find that is in the current drafts directory to find presenters
for the first session. If I miss someone, I am sure the WG will point
that out to me.
Please first ask all the people to be the authors by call for drafts.
As Tony Li pointed out, we should start with an architecture. That is where we should spend time in the second session, to try and find points where we can find agreement and build from there.it is very clear that there is only two real solutions being worked on at the moment.Something with wide support is better than something completed. It's not "first with code" it's "running code AND consensus".A class can not have code, a solution of a class can.And both can have support or not have to support.But, solutions can be evaluated only after classes are chosen.
It is fine for you to say: it is very clear that there is only two real classes being worked on at the moment. but, you said: it is very clear that there is only two real solutions being worked on at the moment. That is, you are totally confused.
I will leave that to others to judge. - kurtis -