Re: Documents need to conclude

[Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman at IMC.ORG>]

At 05:07 AM 11/11/99 -0800, Dennis Glatting wrote:
> Therefore, I offer to you this rule to consider:
>
>         Once something is committed to paper in a WG a timer
>         starts. The document has 24 months (6 IETF sessions)
>         to either be sent to the IESG for advancement or
>         with WG consensus the Chair petitions the AD for a
>         two session extension, which can be extended in the
>         same manner again. Otherwise the document is
>         withdrawn.
>
> I believe this rule to add something the IETF sorely needs but is
> unfair to impose: a little bit of project management. It's advantage
> is very low overhead.

It is not clear that this needs to be a "rule". It seems to me that, if an 
IETF member thinks that a WG draft has been alive too long, a letter to the 
WG chair with a Cc to the AD should be sufficient. I am hesitant to have a 
"rule" as compared to a "best current practice".

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium