Charters should not include applicability statements themselves, IMO. If you want to add the generation of such a document, that seems fair.
Joe David Meyer wrote: > Dimitri, > >> => i would be less affirmative in making such statement -a priori-. in >> order to consolidate our understanding, the charter should include an >> item on how LISP addresses routing scalability and other design goals >> (at least as much as the experiment result allows). this would at the >> same time close the loop with part of the RRG work. > > This is the second or third time you've said this, so I > feel the need to respond. > > So here's how I would like to see this go (i.e., here's > the rule I want for these cases): > > Rule: Anyone suggesting a charter milestone item must > agree to the the following conditions: > > (i). You (or your agent) must commit to write the > document that fulfils the proposed > milestone, and > > (ii). If you (or your agent) defaults on the > commitment described in (i). above, that > is, if the document is not delivered in a > timely fashion (where timely is defined by > the charter milestone), the charter > milestone will be removed and rechartering > the WG is *not* necessary, and > > (iii). The authorative AD(s) must also agree to > these conditions. > > Now, I don't know if a WG/BOF/proposer/chair can > articulate such a rule, but then, in the IETF rules are > made up as we go along, so why not (its not as if the > IETF is a legal (or even quasi-legal) system after all)? > In any event, I will say that without such a rule, > arbitrary milestones (constructed for whatever reason) > can be injected into the charter, and clearly, no one > wants that. > > In the case of the document you are proposing (I think > its a document, correct me if I'm wrong), if you (or your > agent) commit to the above conditions, and if the > document you propose does not hold up/gate any other WG > document (i.e., no other WG document can have a normative > reference to this this document), I see no reason not to > add such an item. Otherwise, I would be reluctant to add > such a milestone. > > Dave > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Int-area mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
