WG Action: Rechartered Dispatch (dispatch)
The IESG <email@example.com> Fri, 04 March 2016 15:26 UTC
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44B231A1BF1; Fri, 4 Mar 2016 07:26:14 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: The IESG <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: IETF-Announce <email@example.com>
Subject: WG Action: Rechartered Dispatch (dispatch)
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2016 07:26:14 -0800
Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, The IESG <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
List-Id: "IETF announcement list. No discussions." <ietf-announce.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-announce>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2016 15:26:14 -0000
The Dispatch (dispatch) WG in the Applications and Real-Time Area of the IETF has been rechartered. For additional information, please contact the Area Directors or the WG Chairs. Dispatch (dispatch) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Current status: Active WG Chairs: Mary Barnes <email@example.com> Cullen Jennings <firstname.lastname@example.org> Murray Kucherawy <email@example.com> Assigned Area Director: Ben Campbell <firstname.lastname@example.org> Applications and Real-Time Area Directors: Barry Leiba <email@example.com> Ben Campbell <firstname.lastname@example.org> Alissa Cooper <email@example.com> Mailing list: Address: firstname.lastname@example.org To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch Archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dispatch/ Charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-dispatch/ The Dispatch working group is chartered to consider proposals for new work in the ART area and identify, or help create, an appropriate venue for the work. Guiding principles for the proposed new work include: 1. Providing a clear problem statement, motivation and deliverables for the proposed new work. 2. Ensuring there has been adequate mailing list discussion reflecting sufficient interest, individuals have expressed a willingness to contribute and there is WG consensus before new work is dispatched. 3. Looking for and identifying commonalities and overlap amongst published or ongoing protocol work. Such commonalities may indicate the possibility of reusing existing protocols or elements thereof published by other WGs, or expanding and/or refactoring the scope of deliverables in an active WG. 4. Protecting the architectural integrity of IETF protocols and ensuring that new work has general applicability. 5. Ensuring that the new work considers and seeks to improve security and privacy. Options for handling new work include: - Directing the work to an existing WG. - Developing a proposal for a BOF. - Developing a charter for a new WG. - Making recommendations that documents be AD-sponsored (which ADs may or may not choose to follow). - By agreement with ART ADs, processing simple administrative documents. - Deferring the decision for the new work. - Rejecting the new work. If the group decides that a particular topic needs to be addressed by a new WG, the normal IETF chartering process will be followed, including, for instance, IETF-wide review of the proposed charter. Proposals for large work efforts SHOULD lead to a BOF where the topic can be discussed in front of the entire IETF community. The DISPATCH WG will not do any protocol work. Specifically, DISPATCH will always opt to find a location for technical work; the only work that DISPATCH is not required to delegate (or defer, or reject) is administrative work such as IANA actions. Documents progressed as AD-sponsored would typically include those that do not have general applicability to IETF protocols, but rather are only applicable to specific use cases and network deployments, for which the scope must be clearly specified. Proposed new work may be deferred in cases where the WG does not have enough information for the chairs to determine consensus. New work may be rejected in cases where there is not sufficient WG interest 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. A major objective of the DISPATCH WG is to provide timely, clear dispositions of new efforts. Thus, where there is consensus to take on new work, the WG will strive to quickly find a home for it. While most new work in the ART area is expected to be considered in the DISPATCH working group, there may be times where that is not appropriate. At the discretion of the area directors, new efforts may follow other paths. For example work may go directly to BoFs, may be initiated in other working groups when it clearly belongs in that group, or may be directly AD sponsored.