Subject: [Isms] rechartering status

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:18:16 +0200

Hi,

the WG wants to recharter and I think it is important now to make
progress on this (one reason is the upcoming WG meeting request
deadline for the Stockholm IETF). While there was some proposed
charter text floating around, I am not sure what the final version was
and who supports it and is willing to work on/review the documents
(other than the authors/editors).

Personally, I like to have an initial draft available for the RADIUS
work on which the WG work can be based. It is not required to have
such an ID, but I believe it helps to have such a starting point since
it makes clear what the scope/details of the work to do actually are.

In addition, it would be nice if people interested in the DTLS/TLS
work could take some time to review Wes' ID and send feedback and
questions to this list so that we get a feel of the amount of work
left to be done on this document.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>

---

From: Wes Hardaker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:42:54 -0700

>>>>> On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:18:16 +0200, Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]> said:

JS> While there was some proposed charter text floating around, I am not
JS> sure what the final version was

I'll re-post it later.  I think the last version was fairly well agreed
upon by everyone involved.  I think it's ready to go.

JS> and who supports it and is willing to work on/review the documents
JS> (other than the authors/editors).

Calling for participants is certainly advisable, but there seemed to be
enough people in the room at the WG meeting (if you read minutes, they
were counted I believe) that both documents had a number of participants
willing to read/review.  The radius document was lacking people willing
to edit, but I think they've stepped up since then so that's good to go
as well (IMHO, of course).

JS> In addition, it would be nice if people interested in the DTLS/TLS
JS> work could take some time to review Wes' ID and send feedback and
JS> questions to this list so that we get a feel of the amount of work
JS> left to be done on this document.

FYI, I've actually received multiple review comments and incorporated
them either into previous versions or the current unreleased-version
already.  I was actually planning on publishing a new version soon, but
was waiting to see what happened with the charter to see if I should
publish it as a WG document or another personal copy.  Let me know.
-- 
Wes Hardaker
Cobham Analytic Solutions