Subject: [ogpx] VWRAP Status

From: Joshua Bell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 15:42:05 -0700

Now that we have consensus to bludgeon the policy conversation further only
in private email for a while, how about a quick status check?

Meetings:

The next IETF meeting, IETF76, is coming up in a little under a month. In
discussion among the co-chairs, area directors, and current slate of draft
authors, we didn't feel that there were enough outstanding issues requiring
a face-to-face meeting this soon after chartering the group. Given that
other WGs needed time on the schedule, we've opted not to have a WG meeting
this time. We expect to have plenty of issues that will benefit from
face-to-face meetings (with mixed-reality components!) for the next several
sessions.

Should any issues arise which require broad working group input and cannot
be resolved on the mailing list prior to the next session,
http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/interim-meetings.html provide guidance on
structuring such meetings. Again, at this point, the mailing list (and
off-list pair-wise conversations) appear to be working sufficiently.

Drafts:

The charter calls out the goal of having the LLSD ('Abstract Type System for
the Transmission of Dynamic Structured Data' - draft-hamrick-llsd-00) and
Intro ('Introduction and Goals' - draft-hamrick-ogp-intro-00) drafts
finished up and submitted by February 2010.

Could the author of those drafts (that'd be you, Meadhbh) and the authors of
other drafts referenced in the charter (Meadhbh/Infinity, David/Zha,
Mark/Zero) comment for the group on the status of those drafts, what parts
are under active work, when the next revisions should be expected, and what
feedback and inputs are desired from group members at this time?

Are any additional drafts being considered at this time by group members?

Note that if anyone submits a new (-00) draft that they hope to have adopted
by the working group, they should name it "draft-MYNAME-vwrap-OTHER-STUFF".
That makes the tracking tools work better.  The WG tools page (
http://tools.ietf.org/wg/vwrap/) will show them as related drafts, and
if/when they become "draft-ietf-vwrap-OTHER-STUFF", the tools will
understand that the WG version replaces the individual one.

Thanks,

Joshua (w/ input from Barry)

---

From: "Infinity Linden (Meadhbh Hamrick)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:15:18 -0700

hey josh.

intro and llsd have received a lot of input, so over the next three
week's i'm going to be pushing out a new LLSD draft incorporating that
feedback, so we can get a new round of discussions going before we
have to have it finished. we're merging parts of david's deployment
patterns draft into the intro draft. it also will be out soonish for
comment. i'll work on an overview of what's changing on both documents
for monday morning.

-cheers
-meadhbh

On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 15:42, Joshua Bell <[email-masked]> wrote:
> That makes the tracking tools work better.  The WG tools page
> (http://tools.ietf.org/wg/vwrap/) will show them as related drafts, and
> _______________________________________________
> ogpx mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx
>
>

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 00:10:44 +0100

Hi Joshua,

Joshua Bell wrote:

> Note that if anyone submits a new (-00) draft that they hope to have 
> adopted by the working group, they should name it 
> "draft-MYNAME-vwrap-OTHER-STUFF".  That makes the tracking tools work 
> better.  The WG tools page (http://tools.ietf.org/wg/vwrap/) will show 
> them as related drafts, and if/when they become 
> "draft-ietf-vwrap-OTHER-STUFF", the tools will understand that the WG 
> version replaces the individual one.

A small comment on "tool will understand that ...": I don't think this 
happens automatically. But the Secretariat can mark a WG draft as 
replacing an individual one.

---

From: Dave CROCKER <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:04:24 -0700

Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>> better.  The WG tools page (http://tools.ietf.org/wg/vwrap/) will show them
>> as related drafts, and if/when they become "draft-ietf-vwrap-OTHER-STUFF",
>> the tools will understand that the WG version replaces the individual one.
> 
> happens automatically. But the Secretariat can mark a WG draft as replacing
> an individual one.

The times I've been part of bringing a private draft into a working group, it
required submitting a new draft under the draft-ietf-<wg-name>-<draft-name>
label -- even if the text is identical with the the pre-working group version.

(I don't know about the Secretariat marking step that Alexey references, but I 
believe it is in addition to, and after, the submission step I'm citing.)

d/

-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:47:54 +0100

Dave CROCKER wrote:

>>> "draft-MYNAME-vwrap-OTHER-STUFF".  That makes the tracking tools 
>>> work better.  The WG tools page (http://tools.ietf.org/wg/vwrap/) 
>>> will show them as related drafts, and if/when they become 
>>> "draft-ietf-vwrap-OTHER-STUFF",
>> A small comment on "tool will understand that ...": I don't think 
>> this happens automatically. But the Secretariat can mark a WG draft 
>> as replacing
>> an individual one.
>

Correct.
I just realized that this might not be obvious to somebody new to IETF, 
so thank you for pointing this out.

> (I don't know about the Secretariat marking step that Alexey 
> references, but I believe it is in addition to, and after, the 
> submission step I'm citing.)

Yes.