WG Action: Formed General Area Dispatch (gendispatch)

[The IESG <[e-mail]>]

A new IETF WG has been formed in the General Area. For additional
information, please contact the Area Directors or the WG Chairs.

General Area Dispatch (gendispatch)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Current status: Proposed WG

Chairs:
  Francesca Palombini <[e-mail]>
  Pete Resnick <[e-mail]>

Assigned Area Director:
  Alissa Cooper <[e-mail]>

General Area Directors:
  Alissa Cooper <[e-mail]>

Mailing list:
  Address: [e-mail]
  To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch
  Archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gendispatch/

Group page: https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/gendispatch/

Charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-gendispatch/

The GENDISPATCH working group is a DISPATCH-style working group (see RFC
7957) chartered to consider proposals for new work in the GEN area, including
proposals for changes or improvements to the IETF process and process
documents. The working group is chartered to identify, or help create, an
appropriate venue for the work. The working group will not consider any
technical standardization work.

Guiding principles for the proposed new work include:

1. Providing a clear problem statement, historical context, motivation, and
deliverables for the proposed new work.

2. Ensuring there has been adequate mailing list discussion reflecting
sufficient interest, enough individuals have expressed a willingness to
contribute (if appropriate given the subject matter of the proposal) and
there is WG consensus before new work is dispatched.

3. Looking for and identifying commonalities and overlap amongst published or
ongoing work in the GEN area, within the IESG, or within the IETF LLC.

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).

- Requesting that the the IESG or the IETF LLC consider taking up the work.

- 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. Documents progressed as AD-sponsored would typically
include those that are extremely simple or make minor updates to existing
process documents.

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 GENDISPATCH 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 GEN area is expected to be considered in the GENDISPATCH working
group, there may be times where that is not appropriate. At the discretion of
the GEN AD, new efforts may follow other paths. For example, work may go
directly to a BOF, may be initiated in other working groups when it clearly
belongs in that group, or may be directly AD-sponsored.

Another major objective of the GENDISPATCH WG is to streamline how the IETF
community considers process improvements. Community discussions about process
suggestions that begin on other mailing lists, including [e-mail], will
be redirected to the GENDISPATCH mailing list where they will be facilitated
by the WG chairs. Proponents of process improvements will be encouraged to
craft concrete proposals for discussion on the GENDISPATCH mailing list, with
the goal of producing a concrete outcome in bounded time. Direct requests to
the IESG may also, after proper consideration, be redirected to the WG. For
proposals to be considered by the WG they will be expected to meet guiding
principle #1 above.

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

A review of the efficacy of this working group will be undertaken 18-24
months after its chartering.