Re: Comments on draft-aboba-sg-experiment-02

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



John,

Thank you for upleveling. I plead guilty to wandering through the detailed design.

I agree without comment with the rest of your observations, but one stuck out.

(2) As the discussion goes on, if appears to me that, in
practice, an SG is little more than a normal WG with an
unusual set of charter-time constraints.  While unusual,
those constraints are well within the boundaries of what
the IESG is permitted to do today.  Indeed, I believe
that groups have been chartered under constraints and
with responsibilities not appreciably different from
those that would apply to an SG.

If your understanding of the intention for SGs is correct (and I think it is), and if current process BCPs allow this mode of operation (and I think they would), I'm wondering if this draft should be published as an ION.

ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3933.txt is intended for process CHANGES. As we both know, the goal was to describe a lightweight alternative to formal/two-BOFs-plus-a-WG change to formal BCPs - RFC 3933 experiments are still relatively heavyweight, compared to publishing an ION.

Perhaps all that is required is to describe a style of WG charter, since the IESG already has discretion to charter as many, or as few, WGs with this style of charter as seems appropriate, and has discretion to continue doing that, or to stop doing that, as results seem to dictate.

If there are formal process changes required (doesn't matter what change, only that SGs require something that is explicitly disallowed in RFC 2418), then a process experiment would make sense, but if we don't change formal processes we don't have to worry about unintended side effects that require formal process change AGAIN to fix (with http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg48434.html for a recent example of what "require formal process change AGAIN to fix" looks like, for anyone else who might have missed it).

Thanks,

Spencer


_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]