Subject: Adrian Farrel's Yes on charter-ietf-rtgwg-04-02: (with COMMENT)

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 12:20:26 -0700

Adrian Farrel has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-rtgwg-04-02: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-rtgwg/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Fully support this: a good change.

I do not believe this change needs to go for external review.

Nit...
s/an optional venue/a venue/
(There is nothing in "a venue" that implies compulsion)

---

Just noticed something we should add:
RTGWG would be a really good home for routing-related YANG models that
are not specifically covered by other RTG working groups, and for generic
routing YANG models.
Could this be added as a work item?

---

From: Alia Atlas <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 00:08:01 -0400

Adrian,

Adding an explicit inclusion for routing-related YANG models not in other
working groups
sounds good to me.  Thanks for the catch and having a helpful extra
pointer/encouragement.

How does adding it as an explicit larger work item such as:

"The specific larger topics that RTGWG is currently chartered to work on:

 * ....

 * Routing-related YANG models that are not appropriate for other RTG
working groups.  This
   may include generic routing YANG models.
"

Thoughts?

Alia