Re: no interim meeting -- read the rules

["Tom Petch" <nwnetworks@dial.pipex.com>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: "Andy Bierman" <ietf@andybierman.com>; "Netconf (E-mail)"
<netconf@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 7:22 PM
Subject: RE: no interim meeting -- read the rules


Right. We seem to need:
- comments on the current draft
- a requirements for notifications in NETCONF contribution - desired in
Internet-Draft format
- contributions for other solutions

A dialog with the syslog community also could be useful.

Dan

I do follow syslog.  The WG now has a new charter to produce
TLS based security - 'that is what the industry uses' - by November 2006 but, as
I have commented here before, participation is thin and I am not over confident
that the objectives will be met.  And anyone familiar with MIB modules -
probably
not many on this list:-) - could look at the MIB I-D, which is required by IESG,
and judge how much effort is still needed.

Tom Petch


Then we can discuss what form of meetings we need. I will do my best to
help (AD hat on). Rules must help the process while keeping it fair. For
example the rules seem to allow to have an interim meeting immediately
after the IETF supplementary to the usual meeting during the IETF. But
we need to have rough consensus that this would be helpful.

Regards,

Dan



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