Subject: Re: [newtrk] last call on newtrk draft charter

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 13:52:50 +0100

Spencer,
I would also be looking towards the WGS as a way for a WG to announce to
other WGs and outside bodies "this work is starting to become stable enough
for you to start assuming that this WG will, at some stage, approve a draft
that looks something like this.  We are now seeking your feedback and
invite you to consider this referencing this work in your protocol
designs".

- Alistair URIE

                      "Spencer Dawkins"                                                                                                   
                      <spencer@mcsr-labs.         To:      <[email-masked]>                                                     
                      org>                        cc:                                                                                     
                      Sent by:                    Subject: Re: [newtrk] last call on newtrk draft charter                                 
                      owner-newtrk@lists.                                                                                                 
                      uoregon.edu                                                                                                         

                      02/02/2004 13:01                                                                                                    
                      Please respond to                                                                                                   
                      "Spencer Dawkins"                                                                                                   

Lars-Erik,

The problem WGS is intended to solve is that just knowing that draft
06 is a working group document doesn't help you figure out whether the
WG thinks they are just starting, just ending, or somewhere in the
middle, so that when people decide to implement and gain experience,
they don't all implement the same version of the spec.

The problem WGS is not intended to solve, but I hope that it does, is
that when people start implementing a product based on a working group
document in advance of an RFC, they don't all implement the same
version of the spec, so WGS will likely help with early
interoperability in products as well.

I think.

Spencer

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lars-Erik Jonsson (LU/EAB)" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 1:20 AM
Subject: RE: [newtrk] last call on newtrk draft charter

> Scott and others,
>
> I think the charter is good enough to work from, but there is
> one thing in the text that I think should be better clarified
> (at least it is unclear to me).
>
>    "3/ there should be some form of "working group snapshot,"
>        this might or might not be a formal stage on the standards
>        track and might or might not be an archival publication"
>
> What is meant with a WG snapshot, and what is the actual current
> problem this is addressing? Are we talking of "complete WG
snapshots",
> i.e. unified "releases" of all WG documents, or are we talking of
> snapshots of each WG document? If it is the latter, is not that what
> we have with WG Internet Drafts today? One can easily find out from
> the WG web pages which drafts are WG documents, and each draft
version
> is a snapshot of the document development. If we are thinking of
> complete WG snapshots of all documents, I can not really see the
> reason for introducing that, nor do I think it would be a good thing
> (rather the opposite).
>
> /L-E
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email-masked]
> > [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of
[email-masked]
> > Sent: den 26 januari 2004 16:04
> > To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> > Cc: [email-masked]
> > Subject: Re: [newtrk] last call on newtrk draft charetr
> >
> >
> > http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/msg00033.html
> >
> > ---
> > From [email-masked]  Mon Jan 26 00:13:10 2004
> > X-Original-To: [email-masked]
> > Delivered-To: [email-masked]
> > Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 00:13:09 -0500
> > From: John Leslie <[email-masked]>
> > To: Scott Bradner <[email-masked]>
> > Cc: [email-masked]
> > Subject: Re: [newtrk] last call on newtrk draft charetr
> > References: <[email-masked]>
> > Mime-Version: 1.0
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> > Content-Disposition: inline
> > In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>
> > User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
> >
> > Scott Bradner <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > >
> > > this is a 'last call' for the newtrk draft charter before
sending it
> > > off to the AD/IESG - please comment (if you are going to) by
> > > friday jan 30
> >
> >    Could we have a URL for the document being last-called?
> >
> >    (I'd _really_ rather not guess which document it is.)
> >
> > --
> > John Leslie <[email-masked]>
> >
> > .
> > newtrk
resources:_____________________________________________________
> > web user interface:
http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk.html
> > mhonarc archive:
http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/index.html
> >
>
> This communication is confidential and intended solely for the
addressee(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution
is prohibited. If you believe this message has been sent to you in
error, please notify the sender by replying to this transmission and
delete the message without disclosing it. Thank you.
>
> E-mail including attachments is susceptible to data corruption,
interruption, unauthorized amendment, tampering and viruses, and we
only send and receive e-mails on the basis that we are not liable for
any such corruption, interception, amendment, tampering or viruses or
any consequences thereof.
> .
> newtrk
resources:_____________________________________________________
> web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk.html
> mhonarc archive:
http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/index.html

.
newtrk resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/index.html

---

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 06:59:55 -0600

Interesting. In the absence of WGS, I think other workgroups and
outside bodies base their assessment on adoption of a draft as a
working group document, and this seems to be way too early in the
process.

The other choices, working group last call or publication as an RFC,
are way too late. WGS is somewhere in the middle.

Spencer

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <[email-masked]>
To: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 6:52 AM
Subject: Re: [newtrk] last call on newtrk draft charter

>                       Sent by:                    Subject: Re:
[newtrk] last call on newtrk draft charter

.