On 10/2/22 21:04, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
On 03-Oct-22 13:17, Keith Moore wrote:
I would instead say that any group that, whether via the charter or
the chair, is told "you have to do it this way" should be immediately
shut down.
Hang on. There are occasions when the charter is quite restrictive for
a good reason connected with the "running code" part of our mantra.
For example, I think the original NFS WG was restricted by
backwards-compatibility with proprietary NFS. (However, I don't know
where I'd look to find the original NFS charter.) In the current DMARC
charter it says:
"The working group will seek to preserve interoperability with the
installed base of DMARC systems, and provide detailed justification
for any non-interoperability."
I'm sure there are many other examples, as well as quite a lot of
charters referring to a personal I-D as a starting point. So while
charters cannot preempt the final rough consensus, they can certainly
restrict the starting point.
I will concede that there are a few good examples, particularly those
for which interoperability with a substantial installed base is
considered important. But I've seen lots of charters that essentially
dictate the solution without a good reason that I could see.
(It still troubles me, for example, that it's 2022 and the Internet
still doesn't have a widely-applicable file system access protocol.)
Keith
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
