Subject: [PMOL] PMOL framework: changing the "Performance Metrics Entity" definition to directorate
From: Benoit Claise <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 06:57:47 +0200
List-Id: Performance Metrics at Other Layers <pmol.ietf.org>

Dear all,

The current PMOL "Framework for Performance Metric Development" draft, 
draft-ietf-pmol-metrics-framework-04, refers to the PM Entity as such:

    3.1.  Performance Metrics Entity (PM Entity)

        The Performance Metrics Entity, or PM Entity, which may in future be
        a WG or directorate or a combination of these two, must coordinate
        the performance metric development at the IETF.  Similar to The
        "Guidelines for Considering Operations and Management of New
        Protocols and Protocol Extensions" RFC 5706 [RFC5706], which is the
        reference document for the IETF Operations Directorate, this document
        should be consulted as part of the new performance metric review.

        The PM Entity should be composed of experts in the performance
        community, potentially selected from the IPPM, BMWG, and PMOL WGs.

Historically, it was decided that the PM Entity would a generic term, 
directorate or WG, without a clear specification. The point was that we 
would decide later on the content of this PM entity, after the framework 
document was published.
However, now, a couple of years after the BOF at the IETF-69, a 
directorate might seem a more suitable solution than a new WG.

Would you have some issues to clearly specify the PM Entity as a 
directorate?
This draft could then become a RFC similar to RFC5706 "Guidelines for 
Considering New Performance Metric Development"

Feedback?

Regards, Benoit.