Subject: [radext] Process surrounding Peter's fragmentation proposal

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 06:57:11 -0500

So, Peter's f/floated a sketch of a proposal on the list and has gotten
some initial feedback.
At this stage in the process it's important that people be given an
opportunity to present alternatives but not to delay the process
indefinitely.
In general, I've seen this handled by asking people to present their
proposals in the form of an internet draft by some deadline.

So, since people were wanting a call for adoption on Alex's proposal, I
think it would be reasonable to establish a deadline reasonably soon for
any alternatives to Alex's proposal.  I propose that any such
alternative needs to be submitted as an individual I-D by the 00 cutoff
for the Upcoming IETF.  I believe that gives a couple of weeks, which is
in my experience enough time for a reasonable sketch.  I wouldn't expect
such a draft to be as detailed as Alex's proposal as he's had a couple
of rounds, but I would expect more detail than a slide deck.  (I do
appreciate the slide deck though. That was a great summary to get
discussion started.)

Then the WG can discuss the proposals on the table  after the 00 cutoff
and adopt 0 or more of them.

Peter noted that his proposal may not be in competition with Alex's
proposal. So, even if he doesn't choose to make it formally as an i-d
now, then he could potentially bring it up later.  However, the IETF
does have a moderate bias in favor of one solution per problem. So, late
comers do tend to have to meet a significantly higher bar, just as a WG
tends to have to meet a significantly higher bar at IESG review if it
proposes multiple solutions to similar problems.

I think we should decide when that bar gets raised and I think it should
be during this IETF cycle. I think that gives a fair balance between
giving people a chance to propose alternatives and keeping things moving
so that ABFAB and other parties are not delayed by the process.

Chairs, participants, does this sound reasonable?

--Sam

---

From: Alan DeKok <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 07:29:43 -0500

> Chairs, participants, does this sound reasonable?

  It works for me.

  Alan DeKok.

---

From: Jouni Korhonen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 15:36:53 +0200

Folks,

From a chair point of view, there is still only one proposal on table
to consider - I have not seen a competing I-D. There is no need for 
any further deadlines; the topic is in the charter and there has been
2 months time to come up with a competing I-D for a chartered item. I
think the process has been fair so far in that sense.

As I already mailed to some (or one?) author a while back, a single
email from the _authors_ to chairs asking for WG adoption when they
think the I-D "is in a good shape enough" is all that is needed. Been
waiting for that.. If I missed such email, sorry about it.

- Jouni

On Feb 4, 2013, at 1:57 PM, Sam Hartman <[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> radext mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext

---

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 08:46:41 -0500

>>>>> "Jouni" == Jouni Korhonen <[email-masked]> writes:

    Jouni> Folks,

    Jouni> From a chair point of view, there is still only one proposal
    Jouni> on table to consider - I have not seen a competing I-D. There
    Jouni> is no need for any further deadlines; the topic is in the
    Jouni> charter and there has been 2 months time to come up with a
    Jouni> competing I-D for a chartered item. I think the process has
    Jouni> been fair so far in that sense.

To be clear I'm also OK with this.

AUthors, let me know if I can help in any way to get to a point where
you're ready to mail the chairs asking for adoption.

---

From: Alejandro Perez Mendez <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 16:45:39 +0100

Hi Jouni,

We are about to reflect some of the comments collected in a new version 
05 (it should be prepared by the end of this week the later), and then 
we will make the call for adoption.

Best regards,
Alejandro