RE: Bof at next IETF?

[<john.loughney@nokia.com>]

Hi Avi,

> John can you share with us what standard do you use to 
> measure progress.

Revision of drafts well before the draft cut-off date is
a good indicator.
 
> And can you please comment on how much work will be done if there wasn't a
> working group vs. how much work will be done if there was a  working group?

Should it make a difference? What extra does a WG do to make the work happen?
 
> As well, in 58 8 to 10 people have agreed to do the majority of the work.
> Is this not enough?

My understanding was that progress on the drafts was expected and discussion
on the charter was to take place so that a draft charter could be sent to the
IESG.  We really haven't discussed the charter.  But at the last meeting,
I remember that a significant number of people thought it would be best
for the WG to be AAA Extensions, not just RADIUS extensions, but we haven't
discussed that on the mailing list.

> Current partial listing(as obtained from the list)

And how do all of these related to the proposed charter and what is the
current support for including this work in the WG?  These are the
kind of discussions which are needed, imo.

John

--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>