On 2009-10-02 18:54, Ahmad Muhanna wrote:
...
> [Ahmad]
> If that the case, I do not see the difference from keeping the INTAREA
> meeting as is and when there is a specific document of interest, the ADs
> should be able to send it to the respected WG to adopt and follow the
> usual process. I believe the process in the INTAREA meeting should not
> be as strict as a regular WG. The ADs should have the flexibility to
> move/suggest certain documents of interest to other regular working
> groups more easily. In all cases, that document needs to follow the
> regular process of the respected wg and have the required consensus,
> anyway.
That doesn't help if there is no WG with an appropriate charter.
Then, we need the discipline of an INTAWG to make sure the document
is properly reviewed and the consensus is properly judged. I think
this is a better path than individual submission to an AD. (In fact,
I realised a couple of days ago that many of the issues I failed
to move forward while I was General Area AD would have benefitted
from a formal GENAWG with independent chairs.)
As other areas show, this doesn't prevent also having a less formal
INTAREA meeting as well as a formal WG. I agree that the informal meeting
is also valuable.
Brian
Bran
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
