That’s fine. It’s just my opinion. But as responsible AD you can of course handle this as you like.
Mirja > Am 02.09.2016 um 18:36 schrieb Kathleen Moriarty > <[email protected]>: > > Hello, > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> two comments: >> >>> Am 02.09.2016 um 15:41 schrieb Tero Kivinen <[email protected]>: >>> >>> Also I would assume that during 2017 we most likely will get some new >>> work items that will start working on, thus we will most likely want >>> to do recharter by the end of 2017 anyways. >> >> If that’s the case I would recommend to remove the deadline from the >> charter. Please note that if you end up without new work you can always ask >> your AD to close the group (even without this deadline in the charter). > > I don't see why this is such an issue, including a deadline in the > charter. It hasn't been a problem for the past 2.5 year (and for the > AD for this group before). > > I'm fine with a deadline remaining in the charter. > >> >>> And if there is nothing >>> new to be done, and we have only 1-2 items left, we can continue >>> working them without WG if needed. >> >> That’s usually not a good ideas. If you don’t have a wg all docs need to be >> AD sponsored. If you have a wg you can just finish your doc, ask for reviews >> on the mailing, and run an WGLC to ensure there is enough review. You don’t >> have to have meetings or what ever. I don’t see a reason to close a wg >> before the work is done (if there is enough energy to finish the work). > > I can manage this with the WG. > > Thank you. > >> >> Mirja >> > > > > -- > > Best regards, > Kathleen _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
