Re: Recharter proposal draft (was Re: Poll for virtual interim meeting in the week of September 25th)

On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 6:31 PM Velt, R. (Ronald) in 't <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Abdussalam,
>
>
>
> Hi Ronald,
>
>
>
> I think if there is a *recharter proposal* prepared by WG
> chair/participant as a start, so we can discuss on the list before
> virtual_meeting, so it will help in the meeting discussion.
>
>
>
> Yes, that can certainly help. I intend to post a “strawman” charter text
> before the meeting. It cannot be more than that until we decide on the Work
> Items to take on. (Obviously, “Maintenance and Extensions of {OLSRv2,
> Babel, DLEP}” can already be added).
>
>
>
> Or I think may be it was already discussed before but not summarised as
> proposal_draft. However,
>
>
>
> My interest is to add to the new proposal charter:
>
>
>
> - Informational - (updates RFC2501) MANET use cases ( includes RFCs of the
> WG as DLEP and OLSRv2 use_cases and includes MANET use within 5G mobile
> applications).
>
>
>
> - Standard - MANET Reactive Routing protocol
>
> - Standard - MANET Multicast Routing protocol
>
> - Experimental - MANET Hybrid Routing protocol
>
>
>
> In my view, the most important criterion for deciding whether or not to
> add specific Work Items to the charter needs to be: Are there WG
> participants who are actually “ready, willing & able” to perform the work
> required? Perhaps you can indicate, for the potential Work Items you
> mention above, to which ones you would like to actively contribute.
>

I would want to contribute in all items mentioned, but for priority the
informational_usecase and standard_reactive, I am still not done with their
initial draft, but does the WG want me give a presentation in meeting
without the submit of a draft to show ready/willing/able?

Best Regards
AB

_______________________________________________
manet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet