<chair-hat=on>
For the record:
IF there is identified work to do rechartering is an easy step.
Lets identify what remains from existing charter that is still relevant.
Add any new work proposed and there is interest in pursuing by more people than
just the editors.
Olafur
Ps: the best way to figure out if a WG is done is to threaten to shut it down
On Thursday, 4 February, 2016 20:37, "Shumon Huque" <[email protected]> said:
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Lawrence Conroy <[ [email protected] ](
mailto:[email protected] )> wrote:
Hi folks,
so ...
ogud + friendly AD:
There seems some serious reluctance to re-charter DANE to do more work (for
reasons I'd love to see spelt out).
The question's been asked, but I haven't seen a detailed answer.
Shumon/Bello/Melinda/...:
Given that reluctance, if you want to do some work, develop a charter though
the BOF
process (same as keyassure/DANE did), convince the ADs, and get a ->new<- WG
for this new work.
[maybe called SWEDE?]
Thanks for the suggestion! I'd prefer to try to recharter the current group
with any new work items first, before this more drastic option. But glancing
at the current charter just now, it might already cover some of the work
that I outlined earlier.
--
Shumon Huque.
_______________________________________________
dane mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane
