Re: [lisp-interest] While we're waiting for lisp@ietf.org to come up.....

[Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Darrel Lewis (darlewis) wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Hi, all,
>>
>> I'm a bit confused. I though the consensus from the last 
>> meeting was that LISP would be an IRTF WG, not IETF.
>>
>> Joe
> 
> 
> Hi Joe,
> 
> At the Dublin EXPLISP BoF Jari asked two questions of the (approximately
> 80) attendees.
> 
> 1) How many think this work should be done in the IRTF/RRG?
> 	~40 people raised their hands
> 2) How many think this work should be done in the IETF?
> 	~20 people raised their hands
> 
> So there was no clear consensus for anything at the EXPLISP BoF.
> 
> Note that the question 'Should an IETF WG be formed?' was never directly
> posed.

Fair enough - I'll rephrase:

Given that 2/3 of the attendees thought that this would be IRTF rather
than IETF work, why is an IETF WG being formed?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkkkargACgkQE5f5cImnZrsvKgCeJvxLJEV8O0gqw7htuYbTh7wC
IHIAoOwFOdTJd1WSRQCHP+tE04wnwIdN
=+EUX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----