Re: [Syslog] Proposed charter

["Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca at avaya.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: syslog-bounces at ietf.org 
> [mailto:syslog-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of David Harrington
> 
> As co-chair: Let me make this clear - anybody can write a 
> proposed charter for a WG and present it to the area 
> directors for approval; you do not need current chairs to do 
> so. Working with the current chairs to fashion a charter 
> makes a difference because the area directors have experience 
> with us, and they know we know how to fashion a charter, and 
> if this is a "re-charter" that might involve retaining the 
> existing chairs. Any proposed WG could be called something 
> other "syslog WG". It could be created in the Security area 
> or the OPS area (and would need to be presented to the 
> appropriate area directors). The current chairs may or may 
> not continue as chairs for (or even be involved in) a 
> rechartered or newly chartered WG.
> 

Re-chartering an existing WG and forming a new WG are two different
cases. For re-chartering at least in the OPS area we prefer that an
existing working group debates and reaches some kind of consensus about
a proposed new charter text and then submits it to the AD's. I do not
know if the same practice is followed by SEC or other areas but I
suspect it might not be that different. New Working Groups follow a
different process, which may start by a bar-BOF, or BOF, new or old
players proposing a charter, implies mandatory IETF review and other. 

Dan