Wojciech, As majority of the WG is OK with the assessment, we are going with that now. Significant amount of your disagreements seem to stem from unstated requirements, as multiple people already stated on the ML. If you are convinced about those additional requirements, it is best if you get DSLF to agree including them in the next revision of the requirement set. That'd be the most productive approach. Until than, we'll go with what is stated in the official DSLF liaison with respect to the requirements.
Anyway this is just the beginning of information exchange between IETF PANA WG and DSLF. Further two-way communication between the two is welcome and even expected. Alper _______________________________________________ Pana mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pana
