Subject: [Rift] Warren Kumari's No Objection on charter-ietf-rift-00-04: (with COMMENT)

From: Warren Kumari <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 15:00:10 -0800

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-rift-00-04: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-rift/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm always concerned when a charter is specifically based on a document:
"The RIFT Working Group is chartered for the following list of items:

 - A Standards Track specification based on draft-przygienda-rift. The document
 will include:"

What happens if, after chartering, the WG discovers a major issue, and/or
decides to rewrite draft-przygienda-rift from scratch? Perhaps it should
instead be something like: "A Standards Track specification addressing the
requirements in draft-przygienda-rift"? Or moving the document itself into
milestones?

Note that this is just a comment; I won't be offended if you choose to ignore
it :-)