Jon Peterson - draft-peterson-modern-problems-04

MODERN hasn't been an easy topic - lots of differing opinion. Slow
progress - JP keen to see speedier progress.

JP.  Wants agreement from room that this edition is a good start - else
why bother.

Enterprise Role is optional - not necessarily there - User could have
direct relationship with CSP (Registrar).

Questions:

* Chair:  How many have read draft?  Answer:  Only a small number of hands
up.
* Peter K online.  Does a single CSP provide all services? JP: Not
necessarily
* Comment from Henning S online - looks like good as starting point.
* Chris Seal.   What/where is the actual problem statement (as not
presented).  It is in Section 1 of draft-peterson-modern-
problems-04.


Chair:  Call to accept draft-peterson-modern-problems-04.  General Hum in
Room + 1 online.  No Hums against.  Will confirm consensus on the WG list.

Alissa - if document isn't advanced to a WG document, then there will be
discussions on the future of the working group.

-------

Tom McGarry
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/95/slides/slides-95-modern-0.pdf
US wants nationwide non-geographical number portability solution.

Presentation is informational - not intended to be progressed.

Steve - Might be worth keeping the document going as a good use case
to guide and exercise other MODERN work.

Alissa -  Some discussion in IESG about not publishing similar drafts, i.e. whether
it's worth pushing through with RFC number as an informational draft

-----
Chris Wendt - on DRiP
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/95/slides/slides-95-modern-1.pdf

JP. There will be a future requirement for reconciliation.

Chair: Should DRiP be separate or include in MODERN?
Feedback from several that it could be included.

Alissa - would just about fit in to Charter (with a squint) at a suitable
milestone.