![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
At 09:55 PM 12/4/2002 +0100, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
The options seem to be: 1/ move WGs (back) to permanent areas: migrate the SUB-IP working groups to other IETF areas sometime soon, likely before next summer and close the SUB-IP area. Also, reconstitute the SUB-IP (and/or other) directorates to ensure the continued coordination between the remaining WGs.
2/ establish a long-term area: decide that the SUB-IP area will be a long-term one, clearly define its charter, and ask the nomcom to select one or two people to be Area Directors
3/ status quo: continue the SUB-IP Area as a temporary, ad-hoc effort, much as it has been, with the IESG selecting two sitting ADs to continue the effort that Bert & Scott have been doing. But maybe give more responsibility to the working group's technical advisors, normally the AD from the area where the working group might otherwise live.
Mike
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.