RE: Pre-work item review

["Nelson, David" <dnelson@enterasys.com>]

Glen Zorn writes...

> This is pertinent to a question I asked in my own response to this
> question.  My (imperfect) understanding of the IETF process is that
> once a draft is adopted as a WG item, change control is ceded to the
> IETF ....

Yes, I agree.

> ... and that whatever state the draft is in when so adopted becomes
> irrelevant (as do, to some extent, the opinions of the authors).

It seems reasonable for the WG to weigh in on whether the current state
of the draft is sufficiently "well-baked" such that the WG is ready to
take on the change control.  While we have an editor to act as scribe,
the WG is collectively responsible for the content going forward, which
generally implies some work.

> IMHO, a better way to ask this question might have been to ask the
> WG if they thought that updating the old MIBs was important enough
> to work on ...

Yes.  Point taken, however, this work was requested by one of our Area
Directors and is included in the charter, so the chairs presumed that
the work needed to be done.

> ... whether the questions of IEEE 802 attributes (including
> whether they are necessary at all) were interesting, etc.,

This is work that was requested by the IEEE 802.1 WG, and is also listed
in our charter.  Of course, there does need to be a sufficient community
of interest, e.g. in the RADEXT WG, for this work to proceed in the
IETF.

> OTOH,
> this assumes that WGs are formed to solve problems, rather than to
> produce approved documents; maybe that's not the way things are.

I think there is some of both in the IETF today, especially to the
extent that we are asked to take on work at the behest of another SDO.
But I do take your point that implicit in the question of whether
specific drafts are ready to be accepted as WG work items is the
sub-question of whether there is a sufficient community of interest to
solve the problem addressed by the drafts.



--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>