In Section 2.1, I would add in specifically-inappropriate criteria:
- Accept an I+D for the merely fact to have a more structured
discussion in the WG.
Regards
::as
On 02/12/2012 16:47, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 11/28/2012 8:00 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
I led the discussion in the WG Chairs lunch at IETF 78 on this topic.
Slides at http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/group/edu/wiki/IETF78#
Folks,
There is now an Internet Draft, based on Adrian's's slides, intended to
document common practice in the adoption of working group drafts:
Title: Creating an IETF Working Group Draft
Status: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-crocker-id-adoption
Abstract:
The productive output of IETF working groups is documents, as
mandated by the working group's charter. Working groups develop
these documents based on initial input of varying levels of maturity.
An initial working group draft might be a document already in wide
use, or it might be a blank sheet, wholly created by the workiing
group, or it might represent any level of maturity in between. This
document discusses the process of creating formal working group
drafts that are targeted for publication.
Although it is not intended for a standards-track or bcp publication, it
would be helpful to have discussion that moves the document to represent
good agreement among the community.
d/