Francis Dupont wrote:
> => this is this conclusion I contest. BTW the charter explicitely
> mentions SCTP so either we fix the charter or we follow it or we
> make clear the document describes a partial solution and the work
> about the full solution will be done later (i.e., a change in the
> milestones).
The WG charter lists six different issues for the WG to work
on. I don't think anyone has claimed that the first document,
draft-ietf-mobike-protocol, will address all of them (and this
fact should be pretty obvious to anyone who reads the draft).
But I can add a note saying this more explicitly...
<snip>
> => I'll ask the IESG what to do when a WG ignores its IETF charter.
> My concern here is we can't work about SCTP/multihoming support
> in IKEv2 (RFC 3554 for IKEv2 for instance) because it is in the
> MOBIKE charter.
I don't think splitting the work to several physical documents is
"ignoring the charter"; neither is finishing some of those documents
before others.
Best regards,
Pasi
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not
affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for
the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.