RE: Draft EOS minutes

Just to be sure. I my comments were basically meant to say:
 
- The WG seem very inactive. Many todo items keep on the todo list
  and not much (if anything) happens on the mailing list.
  If that continues, then such work items that get no follow up and that
  get no discussion on the list will be removed from the charter.
- The WG (when looking at protocol operations) can try to define some
  work items that would be complimentary to the SMIng work. It may
  mean some changes/clarifications to the WG charter, and I am
  willing to entertain the justification discussion and then defend it
  in the IESG
- The WG should not try to address the "bigger picture" in the sense
  of the operator comments on "what to do for config management"
  "what to do with the xmlConfig discussions" and such.
  ADs want to see proper operator rquirements in this space, and if
  needed, another WG may be formed. But the EOS WG is not there
  revolutionize NM. That would be a separate effort.
- For the WG to continue to exist, the ADs want to see some action
  on the WG mailing list and contributions that get serious discussion
  and evaluation. The proposal to have docs submitted by Sep 15 and
  to see serious WG interest in the form of technical discussions is
  a pre-req in order to even consider continuation and/or extending
  the charter of this WG.
 
Hope this helps to clarify the AD position.
 
Bert