I was just asking whether people thought that they coule make the additional time slot.
>From the tone of your message, you think you can. Thanks for the suggestion of choosing topics and the tie to idr, particularly the route leaks question. --Sandy, speaking as wg co-chair ________________________________ From: Brian Dickson [brian.peter.dick...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 6:36 PM To: Murphy, Sandra Cc: sidr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [sidr] replies needed quickly RE: possible additional meeting times Given that there is not a lot of lead time before this, *and* that the IDR meeting is immediate before this slot... And that there is a moratorium on -00 IDs (meaning any material under discussion is limited to already-submitted items)... Discussing the reqs doc then is fine. Perhaps the time slot adjacency to IDR might make for a good time to consider the issues relating to the material on route-leaks. I suspect that trying to conduct the full proposed agenda, would not be such a good idea. Too rushed, would do more harm than good. I would respectfully suggest that having an agenda of interest to the IDR folk, would actually be a good idea. It is entirely possible that insufficient input from IDR participants is leading to "group think", and that more diverse views would improve the WG output. I also suspect that attracting operator representation (who may be at IDR) would be beneficial as well. I think origin-ops, bgpsec-reqs, and bgpsec-ops would be a good slate. I do not think it would be timely to have a review of bgpsec-protocol, just yet, and in particular, might seem even more exclusionary to have this in the secondary SIDR slot. IMHO. Brian On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Murphy, Sandra <sandra.mur...@sparta.com<mailto:sandra.mur...@sparta.com>> wrote: One important point. The routing AD needs to know the decision by COB UTC time on Tuesday (tomorrow). So replies are needed quickly. --Sandy ________________________________________ From: sidr-boun...@ietf.org<mailto:sidr-boun...@ietf.org> [sidr-boun...@ietf.org<mailto:sidr-boun...@ietf.org>] on behalf of Murphy, Sandra [sandra.mur...@sparta.com<mailto:sandra.mur...@sparta.com>] Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 5:37 PM To: sidr@ietf.org<mailto:sidr@ietf.org> Subject: [sidr] possible additional meeting times The routing ADs have suggested that sidr could use the cancelled EAI and/or the cancelled CODEC slot to make up for the cancelled virtual meeting. EAI was to meet 1300-1500 Afternoon Session I on Monday March 26. CODEC was to meet 1120-1220 Afternoon Session I Friday March 30. Please speak up as to whether either of these two spots would work. --Sandy _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org<mailto:sidr@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org<mailto:sidr@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
_______________________________________________ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
