Subject: [Anima] Conclusions on ACP and BRSKI?

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 20:41:17 +1300

Since there was a meetecho glitch at a crucial time, could somebody please
report the conclusions to the discussions on the ACP draft, and also
for the BRSKI draft?

Regards
   Brian

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2018 15:26:50 +0700

> report the conclusions to the discussions on the ACP draft, and also

Good question.

1) Dan prefers the passport icon over the baby carriage to represent the
   Registrar.

2) Nobody commented on whether or not Constrained-Voucher should contain
   Constrained-BRSKI text.

3) On the ACP draft, there might be a lot of new text from Toerless in order
   to respond to review comments.  This text might need to have a second
   WGLC, and our AD says that we should think about whether or not it
   needs a WGLC.

   {I take this to mean that the WG should have a Consensus decision
   as to whether to have a WGLC, which to me means, one might as well
   just have a WGLC}

{and I tuned-out complete on the current charter discussion on page 3, where
it turned to micromanagement...}

--
Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

---

From: Sheng Jiang <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 13:31:40 +0000

>{and I tuned-out complete on the current charter discussion on page 3, 
>where it turned to micromanagement...}

We will do a short second WGLC on ACP when it is ready for another round of review.

Sheng