At 11:15 AM 12/9/2002 -0800, Vach Kompella wrote:
Let's also let the VRRP WG decide on the fate of SIP WG documents, the CALSCH WG decide on the fate of OSPF WG docs... Let's particularly ignore the fact that the folks closest to the issues have the most interest in getting the best possible outcome.AFAIK, we're not discussing document status; we're discussing working groups and the area that contains them. The documents will be published. And by the way, what do you think a "last call" is? We *do* in fact ask folks to comment on drafts being published outside their immediate area of concern.
As presented, we are discussing six working groups (ccamp, gsmp, ipo, mpls, ppvpn, and tewg), down from an original nine if memory serves, and of which four are likely to complete their work and dissolve during the coming year anyway. So we're really talking about two working groups: ccamp and mpls. The comparison is to Transport (27 working groups, up from a year ago) or Security (17 working groups), and User Services (now closed, with both of its working groups).
If there were new working groups spawning here, one might be able to argue that there is work justifying asking one or two people to dedicate their time as area directors to managing the working groups. It seems to me that moving the two continuing-to-be-active working groups to an active home when the others close is just good-management-101. If we're going to keep the area open, there needs to be a solid justification for doing so, and it's not there.
