Subject: [Gendispatch] Reminder of charter / discussion limits

From: "Pete Resnick" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 11:43:32 -0500

Folks,

I just wanted to send a short reminder of our charter and what it means 
for discussions on this list.

Some discussion of the contents of documents on our agenda is certainly 
necessary to figure out how to dispatch them, and documents without 
homes means we end up having a bit of content discussion because there 
is no other place to do so yet. That said, unlike other dispatch-style 
WGs, we are specifically not chartered to actually work on documents in 
this WG; we're only meant to figure out where to send them.

Please try to contain your enthusiasm about the contents of documents 
until after we get them dispatched. As I said above, a bit of content 
discussion is not the end of the world, but when we see 20-odd messages 
on the draft-adoption draft, 9 on eligibility-expand, and 8 on 
terminology, I start to worry about the rabbit hole some of us might be 
jumping down.

One of your dutiful chairs,

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best

---

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:27:21 -0700

Pete,

> On Jul 22, 2020, at 9:43 AM, Pete Resnick <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Folks,
> 
> I just wanted to send a short reminder of our charter and what it means for discussions on this list.
> 
> Some discussion of the contents of documents on our agenda is certainly necessary to figure out how to dispatch them, and documents without homes means we end up having a bit of content discussion because there is no other place to do so yet. That said, unlike other dispatch-style WGs, we are specifically not chartered to actually work on documents in this WG; we're only meant to figure out where to send them.
> 
> Please try to contain your enthusiasm about the contents of documents until after we get them dispatched. As I said above, a bit of content discussion is not the end of the world, but when we see 20-odd messages on the draft-adoption draft, 9 on eligibility-expand, and 8 on terminology, I start to worry about the rabbit hole some of us might be jumping down.

I was wondering about that too.  So where should be sent (aka dispatched)?

What are the choices?

Bob

> Gendispatch mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch

---

From: "Pete Resnick" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 21:13:30 -0500

On 22 Jul 2020, at 16:27, Bob Hinden wrote:

>> Some discussion of the contents of documents on our agenda is 
>> certainly necessary to figure out how to dispatch them, and documents 
>> without homes means we end up having a bit of content discussion 
>> because there is no other place to do so yet. That said, unlike other 
>> dispatch-style WGs, we are specifically not chartered to actually 
>> work on documents in this WG; we're only meant to figure out where to 
>> send them.
>>
>> discussion is not the end of the world, but when we see 20-odd 
>> messages on the draft-adoption draft, 9 on eligibility-expand, and 8 
>> on terminology, I start to worry about the rabbit hole some of us 
>> might be jumping down.
>
>

Well, the charter lays out the possibilities:

- Directing the work to an existing WG.
- Developing a proposal for a BOF.
- Developing a charter for a new WG.
- Making recommendations that documents be AD-sponsored (which ADs may 
or may not choose to follow).
- Requesting that the the IESG or the IETF LLC consider taking up the 
work.
- Deferring the decision for the new work.
- Rejecting the new work.

If we suggest a new BOF or WG, that probably means pushing discussion to 
a new list. If AD-sponsored, it might just be a 4-week Last Call 
discussion on the IETF list.

The discussion we should have here is if there are sufficient folks who 
think the work is worth going forward (with significant changes or not), 
and, to quote the charter, to see if we've got a "clear problem 
statement, historical context, motivation, and deliverables".

Does that answer your question?

pr