We have many times had WGs whose goals included "produce RFC to document
have <foo> currently works.? The way we make that stick process-wise
historically is to write that into the charter. Since the IESG signs
off on the charter, generally later ADs understand and work with the
agreement.
Whether that is necessary here is unclear.
But we do have lots of precedent for doing this kind of thing in working
groups.
Yours,
Joel
On 11/11/2020 6:14 PM, Toerless Eckert wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 06:06:11PM -0500, Michael Richardson wrote:
Toerless Eckert <t...@cs.fau.de> wrote:
> I am mostly worried to figure out if we can try to lock in the
admissable changes to
> the document as early as possible.
You can change anything you want as long as a 2018-era release of wireshark
and tcpdump can read the result.
Right. thats a good cutoff point. But that was not my discussion point:
My discussion point is that i want to prohibit IETF/IESG review later on to
force
for whatever reasons changes to the doc that would violate your cutoff point -
by
pointing to "this document was accepted to OPSAWG under exactly the aboe
condition,
violating it would render the document useless. Please reserve your suggestions
for improvement for followup work".
Cheers
Toerless
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
