Subject: [OPSAWG] CAPWAP work will remain in OPSAWG (as opposed to a short-lived WG)

From: Benoit Claise <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 11:22:43 +0200

Dear all,

Looking at the different CAPWAP related drafts 
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/search/?name=capwap&rfcs=on&activeDrafts=on&author=&group=&area=&ad=&state=&subState=), 
there were discussions whether we should keep the CAPWAP work in OPSAWG, 
or create a short-lived WG dedicated to CAPWAP.

Regarding a new CAPWAP related WG:

    Pros: might attract more people
    Pros: might attract more review, specifically from people outside
    the IETF (in the case, the IEEE is relevant)

    Cons: more admin on my side (but this one really doesn't count)
    Cons: a new WG is not a guarantee for success.
    Cons: we're a little bit late already

Then, I reduced this list to what's important for the IETF mission:

    The mission of the IETF is to make the Internet work better by
    producing high quality, relevant technical documents that influence
    the way people design, use, and manage the Internet. 

 From there, only one entry is left:

    Pros: might attract more review, specifically from people outside
    the IETF (in the case, the IEEE is relevant)

And I believe that we could achieve the same result by highlighting 
CAPWAP as an area of coordination between the IESG/IEEE.
During the last call on September 30th, Dan (as the IEEE liaison) and I 
did just that.

Conclusion: The CAPWAP work will remain in the OPSAWG

Regards, Benoit