Note: This ballot was opened for revision 01-00 and is now closed.
Ballot question: "Is this charter ready for external review?"
Note that the last paragraph is fairly open-ended and could open up the scope a fair amount. EST work is already complete, and there has been some discussion about CMPv2 on multiple WG lists and there is not necessarily one clear proper home for it (though some comments in LAMPS and Jim suggested doing it in ACE). There is a similar lack of one clear home for EAP over CoAP, though we did get a fair amount of support for it during the WG review period of the proposed charter.
** Recommend noting coordination, as needed, with EMU on EAP ** Recommend milestones for the new scope of work
Submitting 9 drafts to the IESG this year seems ambitious, and striking the last paragraph would defer at least two of them. But I am not in a great position to judge what the group can simultaneously manage. In terms of technical areas, the expanded charter seems to involve sensible adjacencies to the original work.
Hi, I stumble on this sentence. I read it to imply that DTLS is a communication security protocol that supports groups. I think by just striking the last "group" it can be resolved. In addition to the ongoing maintenance work, the Working Group will extend the framework as needed for applicability to group communications, with initial focus on (D)TLS and (Group) OSCORE as the underlying group communication security protocols.