On 15 May 2019, at 14:07, Michael Richardson wrote:
Further thoughts... in order to socialize this better, it would be good if
we followed some kind of semi-common process. This might mean:
1) at IETF(n-1), the chair slides might say:
a) deadline for considering new documents is DATE(IETF(n) - 8 weeks)
b) a virtual interim meeting about said documents will occur during the
week of DATE(IETF(n)-6 weeks). [Exact day/time TBD, Meeting will be
recorded]
Maybe multiple interims depending on demand?
2) WG chair collects requests to consider adoption, notifies the ML, and
schedules a virtual interim meeting.
3) virtual interim occurs, with any oral questions being captured into an
email minutes to the list. Possibly one email per major question.
This naturally generates ML traffic if there is interest.
The discussion of handling questions seems overly proscribed. I’d rather experiment a bit.
4) if there is much excitement, then the WG could start an adoption call, and
the document could become a WG document before IETF(n)!
This also means that we get a really good introduction presentation,
not constrained by end-of-WG meeting, here is "3minutes" talk fast..
‘zactly.
Is this worth an RFC3999 ID?
I think you mean RFC3933. I’d rather have some running code first. AFAICT, there’s nothing in our process BCPs that prohibit was from just doing this.
--aaron
