Fred,
FB> IMHO, the charter of a working group is a contract-of-sorts to accomplish
FB> something. If a working group has no future milestones, I can't imagine why
FB> it is meeting - at minimum, it should be (IMHO) in the process of
FB> rechartering (which is a milestone in its own right). I would like to see
FB> working groups held to their chartered work plans, and rechartered if the
FB> work-plan changes.
My sense is that there is rough consensus on the sentiments you express,
but this does not seem to translate into particular actions.
As you note, for example, we are still authorizing some pretty awful
charters. In particular, they cannot serve as wg project management
reference documents. That is, they do not contain information that
really permits assessing focus and scope (what the working group must
work on) or progress (whether it is being productive in satisfying its
goals.)
FB> I will only tell you how I found them. I went to
FB> see whether there was an obvious example of a working group that was
FB> outside its charter.
So the first idea, for translating into action, is to do an audit of the
charter regularly. This is not a new idea, of course, but such reviews
do not seem to be getting done. If this is going to be a serious tool, I
think it needs to be done by more than Area Directors. We need to have
review and enforcement of milestones be a priority WITHIN working
groups.
It is not that participants cannot raise such concerns now, it is that
they generally don't. In other words, we need a cultural change that
encourage participants -- most especially chairs -- to raise progress
questions and get them resolved.
FB> I went to www.ietf.org, clicked on "working groups",
FB> clicked on the area at the top of the list, and clicked on the first
FB> working group under that area. This working group has two milestones that
FB> are past and a number that are future, and no notation of whether they have
FB> met their milestones or not. I then clicked on the second working group in
FB> that area, and found the following:
FB> Consider the dates: what is the argument for this WG meeting? Someone needs
FB> to sit down and very specifically ask "what in the world is happening? Is
FB> this WG moribund and in need of some merciful person to put it out of its
FB> misery? If not, what is the real plan for its future?"
YES!
The simplistic criteria for getting a slot should be:
- What will be accomplished at the meeting?
- How will that constitute wg progress?
- Why should anyone believe the meeting will accomplish its goals?
Unfortunately, all 3 questions are essential.
d/
--
Dave Crocker <mailto:dcrocker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
Sunnyvale, CA USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>, <fax:+1.866.358.5301>
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf