James, > the only real criteria for chartering a working group in IETF is that > a "community of interest" exist and that the IESG and IAB are happy > with the technical soundness of the idea. 4 years later, after much > good but essentially useless work, the protocol is complete but nobody > wants to deploy it ...
FWIW, the IESG and IAB are very interested in actual deployment and implementation plans behind that community interest. And we use this kind of information when approving BOFs, WGs, and rechartering efforts, every time. Obviously not always with perfect results, but it is incorrect to say that we do not care about this aspect. > I believe IETF should not charter work on new protocols until either > a) there is a liason letter from an SDO that can control deployment > asking specifically for the new protocol, or b) there is an industry > forum with an implementation asking for standardization, indicating a > committement of resources towards implementation and deployment. This is not the current procedure, nor do I think it would be a very good one. I think we are moving fast off topic for this list so I won't go into the details (but food for thought: do the plans from others always succeed? Who cares about the Internet technology that is not tied to a specific access?). Jari _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
