Fixing documents and proposed agenda for Minneapolis

The IESG has responded to our various drafts and so it makes sense to
discuss how we should proceed.  It is really hard to figure out in the ID
tracker where the comments are (I had to ask our AD for help), so here's the
link:
https://www1.ietf.org/IESG/EVALUATIONS/draft-ietf-impp-im.bal

I would appreciate it if each document editor and any other interested
parties could review the comments received, and discuss any relevant issues
on the mailing list.

To clean up our organizational/process impasse, I'd also suggest that we
take up discussion of the "de facto charter" on the mailing list and in
Minneapolis.
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-day-atkins-impp-defacto-00.txt

I think that we should approach this discussion with the idea that we have
to answer these two different questions:

1. What is the right role (if any) for the IMPP WG to fill?

2. If there is a role for it to fill, is that role substantially similar to
what is in the de facto charter draft or is it something quite different?
[If it's quite different, what is it?]

Thanks,

--Mark





  [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, please]