concluding LDUP WG (Was: LDAPv3 Replication Access Control Design Team Report)

At 10:32 PM 2002-09-09, Chris Apple wrote:
>Silence, in this case, is not likely to mean consent as
>it sometimes does in the IETF...it is likely to mean that
>John and I will have to evaluate whether or not to suggest
>to the Applications Area Directors that the LDUP WG be
>prematurely concluded.

Regardless of consensus on this issue, you should evaluate
(with WG input) whether or not the WG can complete its
deliverables in a reasonable amount of time and, if not,
recommend the WG be shutdown.

While I think we can complete the LCUP work item in a
reasonable amount of time, I have serious doubts the WG
will ever complete LDUP work items.  The WG seems to be
floundering here, not able to focus on the critical issues
and hopelessly lost in requirement debates.

So, not only do I believe new WG items should not be added
to our charter, we should either 1) narrow the focus to
the basic replication protocol work or 2) concluded (after
completing LCUP work).

Kurt