WG AD pointed in meeting118, We need more charter discussions

Hi All,

 Regarding this issue of low volume of participant input, usually it is
normal in many IETF WGs for some our main_responsibility reasons especially
within corona19 years, however, I don't think within IETF WGs there are low
respond for the WG charter proposals.

 As Jim mentioned I agree that we need to discuss the WG_charter more, and
also agree to show interest and why we are interested as Juliusz mentioned
for multicast. Furthermore, IMHO we should not push back
input/proposal/discussion_topics just because it has no implementations
announced/heard, due to many ietf_standards (including our manet standards)
were adopted before implementations known, so simulation implementation
tests are acceptable as start for discussions/adoptions.

  Finally, Don mentioned we need input drafts, so if there is interest for
topic please submit them including why we should not do multicast if that
will be the direction for now.

Best regards
AB

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