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

On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Ben Campbell <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On Oct 16, 2012, at 1:32 PM, Mary Barnes <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Your suggestion to discuss in DISPATCH and decide if and where we want
>> to do that work makes sense, and is what DISPATCH is for. Presumably we can
>> do that in Atlanta.
>>
>> I believe we're past the deadline for "official" DISPATCH agenda time for
>> Atlanta. Mary, since you've already commented, do you have thoughts on that?
>>
> [MB] Yes - we are past the "official" DISPATCH dates.  Although, we have a
> light agenda since only one topic was requested before the deadline.  We
> may have some extra time and pending approval from the ADs, we could have
> an unofficial discussion after the "official" agenda to kick this off and
> pursue it formally in DISPATCH in March (with the discussion focusing on a
> proposed charter).  I'll ping the ADs and see what they think. [/MB]
>
>>
> I also assume any such discussion would be dependent on someone stepping
> up to lead it, right? It seems like there are really at least two things
> under discussion on the list: SIMPLE/XMPP inter working, and whether work
> is needed on SIMPLE itself in order to facilitate interoperable
> implementations.
>
[MB2] Yes, we would need people willing to lead the work as well as folks
that are willing to contribute to and review documents.  Yes, there are two
separate things.  My comments were on the former.  I think the latter is a
different beast and needs more consideration before thinking that we have
something to do or whether we should do something. [/MB2]

>
> Thanks,
>
> Ben.
>

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