Closed billwuqin closed 4 months ago
@billwuqin , e-impact, as per Suresh, cannot publish (or is at best very limited and constrained into this).
Defining a "boundary" between e-impact and this proposed WG seems counter to defining a bridge...
draft-cparsk-eimpact-sustainability-considerations is being split into 3 documents, as per discussion on e-impact.
Yes. As Carlos mentioned above, the draft is being split into three parts and my personal view is that the terminology part is related to the charter mentioned here.
Terminology as part of Work Items considers the draft already. Closing the issue.
I am wondering where is the right place to proceed draft-cparsk-eimpact-sustainability-considerations?E-Impact or this proposed WG? I know E-impact targets to broad scope and help build a whole picture with collaboration with other orgnizations or community, will not specify any IETF protocol work or mechanism work? It seems draft-cparsk-eimpact-sustainability-considerations is more fitted into scope of E-impact. Do we need to draw boundary between E-impact and this proposed WG.