On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 1:42 PM Trent Adams <tadams=
40proofpoint....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> Perhaps it’s just me... but I think it’d be great if we could focus on the
> question of the charter before diving into the solution so that we can
> unlock the coveted “Work Group Status” in order to leap off the deep end.
>
It's not just you. This is what I asked for previously.
The charter (the current text is in the datatracker for all to see) is
queued for a telechat next week. The question the IESG will answer then is
"Is this in a good enough state to submit it to the IETF community for
review?" It doesn't need to be in its final state by then, but the closer,
the better. Then after two weeks of public review and feedback, the IESG
decides whether it's ready to charter and create the working group.
That means there's still plenty of time to change it based on feedback here
and elsewhere; I've simply decided that we're far enough along in the
process to trigger those more formal review steps.
To reframe the discussion, if that helps, you could think about the
standard BoF questions (pulled from RFC 5434):
- there is a problem that needs solving, and the IETF is the right
group to attempt solving it.
- there is a critical mass of participants willing to work on the
problem (e.g., write drafts, review drafts, etc.).
- the scope of the problem is well defined and understood, that
is, people generally understand what the WG will work on (and
what it won't) and what its actual deliverables will be.
- there is agreement that the specific deliverables (i.e.,
proposed documents) are the right set.
- it is believed that the WG has a reasonable probability of
having success (i.e., in completing the deliverables in its
charter in a timely fashion).
The technical discussions can come later, after the chartering process is
complete. What's far more valuable and constructive right now is what
changes people think the charter needs in order to align it with those
points. Anything not in furtherance of that goal is, I suggest, a
distraction.
Please?
-MSK
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list -- ietf-dkim@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ietf-dkim-le...@ietf.org
