+1 dbh
> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sri Gundavelli > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 6:31 PM > To: Donald Eastlake > Cc: Internet Area > Subject: Re: [Int-area] intarea charter > > Agree. Treating it like any other group with WG chairs > running the business, under AD supervison, makes more sense. > > Sri > > > On Wed, 30 Sep 2009, Donald Eastlake wrote: > > > I am also opposed to Area Directors serving as WG chairs of WGs in > > their own Area. > > > > Donald > > ============================= > > Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-634-2066 (home) > > 155 Beaver Street > > Milford, MA 01757 USA > > [email protected] > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Brian E Carpenter > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1, but I think you should consider "hiring" a co-chair who > >> isn't an AD at an early stage. It can get a bit awkward if a > >> document is proposed for adoption that the ADs are unhappy > >> about, unless there is an independent chair to make the consensus > >> call. > >> > >> Regards > >> Brian > >> > >> On 2009-10-01 07:44, Margaret Wasserman wrote: > >>> > >>> I support the idea of creating this WG, and the proposed > charter looks > >>> good to me. > >>> > >>> Margaret > >>> > >>> On Sep 30, 2009, at 12:26 PM, Jari Arkko wrote: > >>> > >>>> All, > >>>> > >>>> We have had Internet Area meetings for a number of years > now, but I'm > >>>> not sure if anyone's noticed that its formally just a > meeting and not > >>>> an official working group. We do have a list, we talk > about important > >>>> topics during the meetings, and sometimes we even > progress documents > >>>> that have no obvious home elsewhere. We run working > group last calls, > >>>> but formally the documents that we take forward are AD sponsored > >>>> individual submissions. > >>>> > >>>> Ralph and I have reviewed the situation and we think > that it would > >>>> be useful to turn the group into an official working group. This > >>>> has a number of benefits: > >>>> > >>>> - the group would show up in the tools.ietf.org/wg/<WG> directory > >>>> and other systems > >>>> > >>>> - we'd have a charter that describes to everyone what the group > >>>> is supposed to talk about > >>>> > >>>> - the process would be clearer for, say, adopting a document > >>>> > >>>> - the ADs would get also a blue dot in their IETF badges :-) or > >>>> depending on workload, we could hire other chairs, secretaries, > >>>> and so on to help with the group > >>>> > >>>> In other words, the group wouldn't be such a special case for > >>>> us to deal with. Thoughts? We have included a suggested charter > >>>> below. > >>>> > >>>> Jari and Ralph > >>>> > >>>> ----- > >>>> > >>>> Internet Area Working Group (intarea) > >>>> > >>>> Last modified: 2009-09-30 > >>>> > >>>> Chairs: > >>>> Jari Arkko <[email protected]> > >>>> Ralph Droms <[email protected]> > >>>> > >>>> Internet Area (int) Directors: > >>>> Jari Arkko <[email protected]> > >>>> Ralph Droms <[email protected]> > >>>> > >>>> Internet Area Advisor: > >>>> Jari Arkko <[email protected]> > >>>> Ralph Droms <[email protected]> > >>>> > >>>> Mailing Lists: > >>>> General Discussion: [email protected] > >>>> Subscribe online at: > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area > >>>> > >>>> Description of Working Group: > >>>> > >>>> The Internet Area Working Group (INTAREA WG) acts as a forum for > >>>> discussing far-ranging topics that affect the entire area. Such > >>>> topics include, for instance, address space issues, > basic IP layer > >>>> functionality, and architectural questions. > >>>> > >>>> The Internet Area receives occasional proposals for the > development > >>>> and publication of RFCs that are not in scope of an > existing working > >>>> group and do not justify the formation of a new working > group. The > >>>> INTAREA WG will also serve as the forum for developing such work > >>>> items in the IETF. > >>>> > >>>> The working group milestones are updated as needed to reflect the > >>>> current work items and their associated milestones. > Significant new > >>>> work items will be brought for approval with the IESG. > >>>> > >>>> Milestones: > >>>> > >>>> December 2009 Submission of IPID document to the IESG as PS > >>>> March 2010 Submission of tunneling issues document > to the IESG as > >>>> Info > >>>> December 2010 Submission of SEAL document to the IESG as Exp > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> 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 > >>> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
