[Gendispatch] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on charter-ietf-gendispatch-01-00: (with COMMENT)

[Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-gendispatch-01-00: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)



The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-gendispatch/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed new work may be deferred in cases where GENDISPATCH does not
    have enough information for the chairs to determine consensus. New work
    may be rejected in cases where there is not sufficient interest in
    GENDISPATCH or the proposal has been considered and rejected in the
    past, unless a substantially revised proposal is put forth, including
    compelling new reasons for accepting the work.

Can work be rejected because the WG thinks it is a bad idea?  (Is that
supposed to be part of "not sufficient WG interest"?)

    The existence of GENDISPATCH does not change the IESG's responsibilities
    and discretion as described in RFC 3710. Work related to the IAB, IETF
    LLC, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes is out of scope.

It's a little bit hard to square "out of scope" with a willingness to
request that those bodies consider taking up work on a given topic.