Subject: The IESG is considering closing some groups with very old milestones

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:07:07 -0800

This is a heads-up.....

The IESG is considering summarily closing the following working groups:

TN3270E
PIM
DNSOP
RAP
BGMP
PPPEXT

It is obvious from their charters that the administative energy to make a 
plan for the group's progress either does not exist or has not manifested 
in a milestone update - all of these groups have milestones dated in the 
previous century.

The IESG is considering just closing the groups and entertaining plans for 
reopening them when new, realistic plans for the groups' progress become 
available.

We know that in some cases, there are WG chairs actively working to get 
updated milestones. We won't close WGs where we expect an updated charter 
on a known schedule, or where the group is going to close within a month or 
two anyway because it's finished.

We'll decide on this at the Seoul meeting.

                            Harald

---

From: David Meyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:20:56 -0800

Harald,

        I would just say that wrt DNSOP, Rob and I inherited many
	problems, not the least of which was a hoplessly outdated
	charter and set of milestones. That being said, perhaps
	it wouldn't be a bad idea to close the WG as a test for
	interest; at that point, if no one steps up with a new
	proposal then it would seem that rechartering/updating 
	milestones wouldn't have been warranted either.

>> We'll decide on this at the Seoul meeting.

	How does that happen? Just curious.

	Thanks,

	Dave

On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 11:07:07AM -0800, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
>> on a known schedule, or where the group is going to close within a month 
>> or two anyway because it's finished.
>>

---

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:50:43 -0800

Dave,
yes, DNSOP is one of the groups referred to in the "We won't close groups 
where we have a plan to get cleaned up" :-)

> 	milestones wouldn't have been warranted either.

Of course, any WG that doesn't have enough constituency to be worth 
continuing should be shut down too... but that's a different metric...

> 	How does that happen? Just curious.

Sunday morning IESG meeting material.

The IESG discusses the matter, and comes to a conclusion, and then the AD 
sends out the request to close the WG..... normal course of events. Of 
course, any dialogue between the AD, the IESG and the WG is taken into 
account when deciding what we think the chances are of the group producing 
useful work in the near future!

                    Harald

---

From: David Meyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 13:38:28 -0800

>> useful work in the near future!

	Thanks Harald. 

	Dave

---

From: "Acee Lindem" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 18:14:59 -0500

Harald,
Could the WG charters be updated automatically via the tracker? 
We've had some problems with timely and accurate updates using the
manual process of sending changes. 
Thanks,
Acee Lindem (OSPF WG Co-Chair)

---

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:46:30 -0800

> manual process of sending changes.

that's SUPPOSED to be solved by using a ticket system.... but yes, we've 
seen some problems.

at the moment, a "WG tracker" tool is on the Secretariat todo list, with a 
tentative beta date in August (it's not first on the list). Until then - we 
rely on training the staff.

                   Harald