Re: Should SIMPLE be rechartered, replaced, closed, or what?

On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Paul Kyzivat <[email protected]>wrote:

> AFAIK the SIMPLE WG currently exists as a placeholder.
> All chartered work was done long ago. There has continued to be a low
> level of q/a discussion on the list.
>
[MB] I don't know what you mean by placeholder.  There is one WG document
that fairly recently went to IESG review.  It's not unusual to keep WGs
open until all the WG drafts are complete - e.g., XCON only closed after
the last RFCs were published. [/MB]

>
> But recently there has been more active interest in new work.
>
> If we want to do more work, we should charter it, either by rechartering
> SIMPLE, by doing the work in XMPP, starting a new wg, or *something*.
>
[MB]  Exactly.  And, I think that's the intent of Peter Saint-Andre's
posting on the updated SIP-XMPP docs. Note, that we discussed this topic 3
years ago in a DISPATCH adhoc session and there was not a lot of momentum
(I personally think that's because it was scheduled on Friday afternoon).
 A separate list for the topic was created (but not announced on DISPATCH)
and then the work went to XMPP WG to be discussed and the consensus was
that there was not enough support for the work.  However, that was
scheduled opposite the exciting SPLICES WG so not all the interested
parties were there.   The best thing to do may be to discuss this work
again in DISPATCH in an official WG session (per our process) and then
decide where it fits. [/MB]

>
>         Thanks,
>         Paul
> ______________________________**_________________
> Simple mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/simple<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple>
>

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple