Subject: Minneapolis Sieve BOF redux

From: Matthew Wall <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 13:10:14 -0500

Just an FYI.

We have until Feb. 22 to put in a formal request for an agenda slot for a
BOF at Minneapolis. Obviously, the sooner we can put something in, the
better the slot...

When I asked about whether to "use" our second BOF, there was a gentle hum
on the list that we should go ahead and do it, but not what I'd yet call a
strong consensus. I don't think anyone objected, though, in concept.

Having been prodded about this again, I've changed my mind a bit.

I'm now thinking that if we could get a full two-hour session (as opposed
to a one-hour BOF), it might be a useful working session, in that there are
multiple implementations and some semantic issues that have clearly arisen
(which might of course be worked out on the list). It would be more in the
character of a working group session than a BOF, in that the primary goal
would be to slog through residual specification issues. 

We're well beyond the BOFish-is-there-interest? stage but still well shy of
needing to form a working group, and rather than worry about "using up" our
second BOF, I'd rather use the time to get as many issues resolved as
possible.

The last agenda item on our BOF agenda be: do we need to form a working
group? I'll bring a charter in hand, just in case (I'll put it on the
list). I still really don't think this is going to be necessary, but if
things are not relatively close to completion, it's probably best if we can
have Plan B in hand to give our Area Directors some advance notice that
we'd want a WG (given that the ADs are trying to lay down a number of
working groups to make room for new ones, not starting one at all would be
a definite bonus 8-). "Plan B" would probably be some concept of 'if the
spec isn't ready by such and such a date, we'll need to meet again, and
therefore having used up our two BOFs a working group is probably
justified', where 'such and such a date' would be sometime after the March
meeting.

In fact, here's a proposed mini-agenda:

Sieve document
 -- open issues

Extensions
 -- open issues

WG or no WG? 
 -- Charter
 -- timetable

- matt