RE: Call for agenda items for Minneapolis

[Edward Lewis <lewis@tislabs.com>]

At 12:42 PM -0500 2/19/02, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>> From: Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine
>>
>> The authors have created a registry-private extension, as other registries
>> have for trademark data, and no doubt will continue to experiment with as
>> the registry experience matures. Such things are properly in operational
>> registry practices documents, or informational I-Ds, not requiring working
>> group change control and process.
>
>I have to agree with Eric.  I'd prefer that we spend meeting time on topics
>of concern to the WG as a whole.

Hmmmm.  I am unsure of this but I think the WG is permitted to review
extenstions that benefit a minority of of users (in this case, specifically
registries).  This would demontrate the "extensibility" of the base and
encourage safe extenstions.

Such a document may lead to a non-standards document, e.g., informational
or experimental.  I'm not giving the green-light for a full bore
consideration here, but I do want to point out that the WG is limited to
just the core/standard documents.

Also, being that we (the chairs) haven't see (m)any other agenda
suggestions and there was a request for 2 hours, we need to ask: What
topics are to be discussed in Minneapolis.  (The chairs want to hear from
the WG.)

(That is besides the obvious - core spec status, implementations...)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                NAI Labs
Phone: +1 443-259-2352                      Email: lewis@tislabs.com

Do you have the time to listen to me whine
About nothing and everything all at once?
-- Green Day ("Basket Case")

Opinions expressed are property of my evil twin, not my employer.