There is an on-ramp for areas, I think we should also have a clearly defined off-ramp. The area WG being the obvious place for this to occur.
The reason I go to a lot of dispatch WG meetings is that often they are the highest value for me. I can get a really good idea of the hot topics in an area I am not focused on in a short time.
What I don't get from this is notice of if the work item was delivered or what was delivered - which is not always the same as the thing promised.
We used to do WG reports in SAAG until we stopped because there were better things to do. But one thing that we lost from that is a wrap up of what was delivered/achieved. Might be useful just to do the recharterings and closures. Probably best to do that before they happen rather than waiting for them to happen since many WGs are effectively closed long before they are shut.
I am really not sure that the 'every area is different' argument really holds. There would be a great deal of value in consistent processes across the IETF. Some areas might spend little time doing dispatching, they might have different processes, but each area can at least document its process.
