Thanks for your review, Pasi! > One possible addition that might help in evaluating the experiment > when it ends: according to the current text, IESG is required to > inform the community of any Study Groups formed. I think decisions > where a SG was *not* formed would be equally interesting. > Yes.
But generally speaking, new work proposals can be classified in three categories: 1) Too confused, no clear demand, etc. 2) Demand is clear, but work remains to determine what exactly the group should do 3) Demand and details are all clear. A proposal from the first category cannot progress. In the second category we'd consider an SG, and in the third a WG. In terms of reporting to the community and evaluating results, we try to be as clear as possible about the status of the different efforts whether or not we have an ongoing experiment. But its clear that understanding whether the SG concept helped is interesting. Just that it may be hard to compare a proposal from category 1 with another one from 2 or 3. Jari _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
