Not that you folks take suggestions from me - but there would be a tremendous value in creating a specific BCP WG that was a permanent part of the IETF to manage the collection and IP issues within BCP's. BCP's are an important part of moving-forward with IP management within the IETF and it seems to me that they are so important that they need to be elevated into a forum of their own rather than just being specific to the WG that they were originally spawned or derived in. The point is that there is a legal liability with publishing a formal document called a "Best Current Practice" which deserves a very formalized process for creating and verifying that the documented method that is being attested to in the BCP is in fact really the Best Current Practice or its just someone's idea of something that wanted to call BCP. This would specifically exclude in the charter of this new WG, and BCP Program Documents from the IPR or Governance WG's. This new 'repository WG' would be responsible for protecting the IETF's good name in the publishing of BCP's The first deliverables would be a set of documents to define how the IETF's BCP program works and how those BCP's are made available to other Standards Processes for their commentary and ratification or adoption. My feeling is that much of the commercial processes for handling say PKI frameworks - like the ER's Trusted Signature Use directives and compliance processes with that would fall into this new WG. The configuration and management or user's guides would also fall under this umbrella as well. >From a Governance Model this costs the IETF nothing to do really and puts all of its documents which are likely to be expired in a time-weighting model by the Industry, in a single place where they can be managed later. Todd Glassey _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf