Re: draft-aboba-sg-experiment-02.txt

[Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov at isode.com>]

Jari Arkko wrote:

> Alexey,
>  
>
> > I am looking for a lightweight process that doesn't introduce as much
> > delay as a typical WG does. 
> >    
> I'm not sure the SG process is what you are looking for.
>  
Hi Jari,
I think your reply just confirmed that.

> FYI: Depending what you do, you may have different alternatives, too
> besides creating a BOF, then WG, and completing your document there.
>
> Some of the alternatives include
>
> - Adding a work item in an existing WG. Rechartering for something that
>  is clearly needed & uncontroversial should not be a big problem.
>
> - Some areas have area WGs that process topics, bug fixes, etc. that
>  do not fit in other WGs.
>
> - Individual submission process. Submission to the AD, last call
>  on the IETF main list.
>  
For the case I was thinking about (i.e. a draft which was a common 
dependency between 2 WGs), the 3rd alternative proved to be the 
quickest. Luckily the document wasn't as controversial as I thought it 
would be. Option 2 was not available due to lack of any such WG in the 
Apps Area. Option 1 might have worked, but it could have lead to a 
discussion about which WG should take it, which is a distraction in 
itself. There is also a perception than rechartering is sufficiently 
painful, so many WG don't bother unless they are forced to.

>  See http://www.ietf.org/IESG/content/ions/ion-ad-sponsoring.html
>
> But if you are just generally unhappy with the speed of WGs,
> that's a tougher problem to solve.
Agreed. My message was partially motivated by a recent thread on apps 
mailing list regarding Individual Submissions versa WG documents.

> Some of the problems, like
> lack of author cycles or contentious topics might follow you
> to whatever process you try to employ.



_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf