Hi Sasha, Yes, your understanding is correct. If there are enough interests in the WG, RTGWG may adopt a problem statement draft and work on it.
Thanks, Yingzhen On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 3:36 AM Alexander Vainshtein < alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com> wrote: > Yingzhen, > > The proposed text looks fine with me, lots of thanks for the work done. > > > > For the sake of my curiosity: do I correctly understand that: > > - Discussion of a problem statement assumes an individual draft as a > starting point > - WG decision to “pursue a problem statement document” effectively > would be expressed as adoption of the problem statement document? > > > > If my understanding above is correct, there is no need to add these > clarifications to the Charter. > > > > > > Regards, > > Sasha > > > > *From:* Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.i...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Wednesday, November 20, 2024 3:39 AM > *To:* rtgwg@ietf.org > *Subject:* [rtgwg] Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Charter updates > > > > Hi all, > > > > Thanks for the review and comments. > > Please see the updated charter below this email, highlighting the changes: > > > > *Incubating new routing-related technologies by developing and discussing > problem statements prior to reaching consensus, which can encourage > proponents to request a BoF or recommend the formation of a new working > group to the ADs. If the working group agrees to pursue a problem statement > document, it will be added to the group’s milestones.* > > > > Please send your comments to the list before 12/2. > > > > Thanks, > > Yingzhen > > > > > ============================================================================================= > > The Routing Area Working Group (RTGWG) is chartered to provide a > > venue to discuss, evaluate, support and develop proposals for > > new work in the Routing Area. It may also work on specific small topics > > that do not fit within any existing working groups. An example of such a > > small topic is a draft that might otherwise be AD-sponsored but which > > could benefit from the review and consensus that RTGWG can provide. > > > > Options for handling new work include: > > • Directing the work to an existing WG (including RTGWG) > > • Developing a proposal for a BoF. > > • Developing a charter and establishing consensus for a new WG. This > > option will primarily be used for fairly mature and/or well-defined > efforts. > > • Conducting a careful evaluation, which may lead to deferring or > rejecting work. > > > > It is expected that the proposals for new work will only include items > which > > are not aligned with the work of other WGs or that may span multiple WGs. > > The Area Directors and WG Chairs can provide guidance if there is any > > doubt whether a topic should be discussed in RTGWG. > > > > A major objective of the RTGWG is to provide timely and clear > > dispositions of new efforts. Where there is consensus to take > > on new work, the WG will strive to quickly find a suitable home for it. > > Reconsideration of proposals which have failed to gather consensus > > will be prioritized behind proposals for new work which have not > > yet been considered. In general, requests for reconsideration > > should only be made once a proposal has been significantly > > revised. > > > > If RTGWG decides that a particular topic should be addressed by > > a new WG, the chairs will recommend the work to the Routing ADs > > with a summary of the evaluation. The Routing ADs may then choose > > to follow the normal IETF chartering process (potential BoF, IETF-wide > > review of the proposed charter, etc.). > > > > Guiding principles for the evaluation of new work by RTGWG will include: > > 1. Providing a clear problem statement for proposed new work. > > 2. Prioritizing new efforts to manage the trade-offs between urgency, > > interest, and available resources in the Routing Area. > > 3. Identifying commonalities among ongoing efforts, which may indicate > > the need to develop more general, reusable solutions. > > 4. Ensuring appropriate cross-WG and cross-area review. > > 5. Protecting the architectural integrity of the protocols developed > > in the Routing Area and ensuring that work has significant applicability. > > > > RTGWG may also work on specific small topics that do not fit within an > existing > > working group. An example of such a small topic is a draft that might > otherwise > > be AD-sponsored but which could benefit from the review and consensus that > > RTGWG can provide. > > > > RTGWG may work on larger topics, but must be explicitly rechartered to add > it. > > The specific larger topics that RTGWG is currently chartered to work on > include: > > • Enhancements to hop-by-hop distributed > > routing (e.g., unicast and multicast routing, LDP/MPLS , Segment Routing) > > related to fast convergence with a goal of fast-reroute mechanisms to > provide > > up to complete coverage when the potential failure would not partition the > network. > > All work in this area should be specifically evaluated by the WG in terms > of > > practicality and applicability to deployed networks. > > • Routing related YANG models that are not within the scope of other RTG > working > > groups. > > • Incubating new routing-related technologies by developing and discussing > > problem statements prior to reaching consensus, which can encourage > > proponents to request a BoF or recommend the formation of a new working > group > > to the ADs. If the working group agrees to pursue a problem statement > document, > > it will be added to the group’s milestones. > > > > The working group milestones will be updated as needed to reflect the > > proposals currently being worked on and the target dates for their > > completion. > > > *Disclaimer* > > This e-mail together with any attachments may contain information of > Ribbon Communications Inc. and its Affiliates that is confidential and/or > proprietary for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, > disclosure, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without > express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended > recipient, please notify the sender immediately and then delete all copies, > including any attachments. >
_______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list -- rtgwg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to rtgwg-le...@ietf.org
