I'm also in favor of WG adoption. In the interim we could discuss further if this fits in the WG's planning and compare to other proposed new work. Maybe this work already fits in the existing charter of ANIMA?
The MASA document could also go for the intended status of "best current practice" which the Registrar document is already set on. Another option is to merge both documents, but no strong preference on that. Esko -----Original Message----- From: Fries, Steffen <[email protected]> Sent: donderdag 23 januari 2025 07:56 To: Michael Richardson <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: [Anima] Re: BRSKI Operational Consideration Hi Michael, Thank you for the repost. I was not quite sure if we can call for adoption when the drafts are expired, hence the proposal to edit first. But I agree, as this is a viable problem to solve, we could go with the adoption first. I would be in favor. I will review both documents and provide comments/input. Best regards Steffen > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Richardson <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2025 9:25 PM > To: Fries, Steffen (FT RPD CST) <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Anima] Re: BRSKI Operational Consideration > > > Michael Richardson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> * Registrar: > >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-richardson-anima-registrar- > considerations/ > >> * MASA: > >> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-richardson-anima-masa-considerations/ > > > I'm very pleased to revise these document. > > I have reposted the I-Ds. > > -- > Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) > Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide > > > _______________________________________________ Anima mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] _______________________________________________ Anima mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
