Why do IETF people focus so much on face-to-face meetings (like London)...?? when the Internet allows them to meet at anytime, in 3D, face-to-face... Jim Fleming http://www.unir.com Mars 128n 128e http://www.unir.com/images/architech.gif http://www.unir.com/images/address.gif http://www.unir.com/images/headers.gif http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/sdks/platform/tpipv6/start.asp http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12213.html http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12223.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marc Blanchet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 11:05 PM Subject: [idn] wg next steps > Co-chairs with the advice of the area directors, technical advisors and > other IESG members would like to propose the following next steps, in order > to narrow down the solution space and build concensus: > > 0. On June 28th 2001 23h59 GMT, temporarily close submission of new wg > documents. > > 1. put in a wg document pool (named pool W) all documents that have a > demonstrated "core of interest". This core of interest would be defined as > having 7 people strongly supporting the proposal. The current candidates > would be idna and nameprep which receive 36 votes in the strawpoll. > > 2. put all other documents in a temporary document pool (pool T). The > authors of those documents are asked to write new documents that could > demonstrate a core of interest for their document or to merge documents > together to build that needed core of interest. Deadline is the London > cut-off date for documents: July 13th 2001. Any new document should be sent > as individual submission (i.e. draft-yourname-...), but will be listed in > the wg web page and announced to the wg mailing list. > > 3. July 14th, All documents demonstrating a core of interest (pool W) will > be placed as wg documents. All others (pool T) will have to be resubmitted > to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] by the authors as individual submissions. > Only the documents who are in the wg document pool will be discussed as > focus of the wg. > > 4. London IETF. Find agreement and concensus. > > Notes: > - If multiple solution strategies (as example: ace now and utf8 later, > ace-utf8 together, ace with directory,...) are suggested, they should be > described in a document and submitted through the same process. > - Most of the London agenda would be to build concensus > - the two pools of documents will be identified in the wg web page. > > We would like to have comments and support from the working group on this > process. If agreement is reached, then we will proceed. > > James & Marc, co-chairs > >
