RE: Bof at next IETF?

[<john.loughney@nokia.com>]

Hi Avi,

> So how is *not* having a BOF going to help progress this further?

Well, that is something I don't have any control over.  However, 
I guess people should have been asking about the bof a bit earlier ...

> > Revision of drafts well before the draft cut-off date is
> > a good indicator.
> 
> Well, I can live with that but why hold us to a higher mark then say other
> WGs.

Well, I have the same problem as you.  Some WGs seem to be created without
much effort and others are heavily scrutinized.  My feelings is that there
should be some standard criteria here.
 
> > Should it make a difference? What extra does a WG do to make 
> > the work happen?
> 
> In my opinion tons of difference.  For one it creates an open place where
> people can talk/comment about related topics.  But I guess some folks behave
> around here as if this is a closed community.

Well, we have the mailing list, so there is no closed community, imo.

> > 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.  
> 
> Regarding the Charter.  There were discussions. And a tone of discussion on
> subtypes and other related issues.

I didn't see a lot of text suggestions about how to improve the charter.  That
is more what I meant.

> >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.
> 
> Not exactly my recollection at all.  First and foremost it was a RADIUS
> gathering.  We did agree to consider whether this should also be a Diameter
> extension group.  I wouldn't characterise it as a significant number of
> people.

I think more than 15 supported the idea, out of 80 is still a significant number
(1 or 2 would be insignificant).  
 
> But who cares.  Why should this minor point stall us?

I think we'd just need to update the charter accordingly, if this was OK.

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/>