Subject: [Tm-rid] Magnus Westerlund's Block on charter-ietf-tmrid-00-01: (with BLOCK and COMMENT)

From: Magnus Westerlund via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 05:01:59 -0800

Magnus Westerlund has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-tmrid-00-01: Block

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-tmrid/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
BLOCK:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think this proposed charter is lacking severely in scope setting for the
proposed WG.

It states a goal:

TM-RID’s goal is to make RID immediately actionable, in both Internet and
local-only connected scenarios, especially emergencies, in severely constrained
UAS environments [8], balancing legitimate (e.g. public safety) authorities’
Need To Know trustworthy information with UAS operators’ privacy.

In addition it states a general direction that is non-binding to the WG:

The current working group will primarily leverage solutions based on HIP as
well as the domain name registration and focused on NPRM [5] published by US
FAA [4] as well as EU CAA.

Can it be made more clear what work the WG actually are expected to do?  It
might be that all these references together actually make the picture clear.
However there appears to be both membership walls as well as large amount of
content to read through to get such an image. I would really appreciate if the
charter could be explicit in forming some boundaries on the scope for the WG.

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

I think there should be some updates before this goes out to make it more
readable.

1. First please spell out the acronyms on their first usage. That is much
easier to read than to have to go back and forth with the at the end acronym
list.

2. I don't understand what this sentence really want to say:
 " WK65041 addresses how to
   neither populate/query registries, ensure trustworthiness of information nor
   make it instantly useful.
Should the neither be before "addresses"?