The IETF tends to charter working groups based on a very large gamble.
Basically, we look for a modestly credible charter and some expressions
of community interest. Then we hope that the charter is sufficiently
substantive and the community interest is real.
Interest, however does not always translate into getting work done,
nevermind getting good-quality work done. Sometimes it does not even
translate into people showing up on the mailing list.[*]
I suggest we alter our model for chartering in order to fix this.
Arguably the proposal is along the lines ofsimilar to what the IRTF is
now doing,
Before chartering, in addition to needing a credible draft charter:
1. There must be an active mailing list for the effort. The word
'active' is key.
2. There must be a credible base of participants; that is, not
just a couple of folk who are active.
3. The effort must demonstrate 'productivity' towards the goals of
the charter.
That is, there must be meaningful community involvement and it must show
that it can get work done.
The criteria of "meaningful involvement" and "productivity" should be
left as entirely subjective. We could spend quite a bit of energy
trying to make them objective, but I don't think it's worth the effort.
It's not that difficult to tell when a group has diverse participation
and is productive.
Simply put, therefore, we should charter a working group only after it
is a de facto working group and the group is already making progress on
its charter.
d/
[*] I've just had to shut down arcmedia for this reason, which is
serving as the trigger for this issue for me, but the issue is broader
and more long-standing, IMO
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net