Re: regarding the re-chartering..

On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Brian Haberman
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> On 9/3/14 12:50 PM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
>> Hi Brian,
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Brian Haberman
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Just for clarification...
>>>
>>> On 9/3/14 12:22 PM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am also concerned on the time DMM is taking on dressing up the
>>>> charter text. I remind you on what Jari Arkko who is founding AD for
>>>> DMM said in Toronto admin plenary:
>>>> WGs should have  solution work from day 1.
>>>
>>> Not "should", but rather "could".  Not all WGs need to have
>>> requirements, frameworks, architecture, etc. That is why this type of
>>> discussion during charter development is important.
>>
>> Here is the quote:
>> WGs should have solution work from day 1
>>
>> from page 22 of Jari's slides at:
>>
>> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/90/slides/slides-90-iesg-opsplenary-7.pdf
>
> Yes, that is what the slide says.  The IESG discussed the contents of
> this presentation and the overwhelming consensus (and what was
> verbalized in the plenary) is that WGs should not be formed where the
> *only* output is architecture, frameworks, and/or requirements
> documents.  The charter should have protocol/solution work on the
> charter from day one.  It does not mean that non-solution documents
> should be skipped if they are needed or provide useful background.
>
> The charter text that Jouni sent to the mailing has four (4) work items.
>  By my read, three (3) of them are solutions to identified problem
> areas.  So, I believe the charter is following the spirit of Jari's
> plenary slides.
>
> Your only complaint is about the first work item.  I have seen people
> asking about clarifications on that work item, but you are the only one
> who wants it removed.  I believe others are in favor of providing a
> document of the high-level models being targeted for the solutions work.
>

You don't seem to understand my points.
Anyway, it is better for me to stop this discussion.

Regards,

Behcet
> At this point, the WG chairs need to determine if there is consensus for
> the latest charter text.
>
> Regards,
> Brian
>