Note: This ballot was opened for revision 07-00 and is now closed.
Ballot question: "Is this charter ready for external review? Is this charter ready for approval without external review?"
I'm good for approval without external review, but wonder whether you think it's worth letting other SDOs know that BMWG has added virtualization to its charter.
This new charter simply reflects what the WG is already doing...
Thanks for addressing my concern.
I am curious how the discussion around Deborah's block will go. Once that is resolved, I do not object to approval without external review. I agree with others that the milestone dates seem aggressive.
External review does not seem to be needed for this change.
I am ok with no external review for this charter. I would love to see something in the charter about interaction with existing WGs (as applicable), specially for the cases where documents are being produced for IETF technology. I see EVPN in the list of milestones, for example; it would be great if the bess WG was at least informed/made aware/given a heads up, etc. on the work. I don't think there's a need to list the WGs, but a generic sentence such as "consult with/inform other WGs as appropriate" would be great!
I'm good with this going forward without external review. On the milestones: "Aug 2018 - Methodology for Next-Gen Firewall Benchmarking to IESG Review" seems pretty aspirational, given that the WG has not yet adopted an associated document.