Re: [Iotops] Martin Duke's Block on charter-ietf-iotops-00-17: (with BLOCK)

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

Please no.  Either create the group or don’t.  We’ve been talking about it since Benoit was an AD.

> On 3 Feb 2021, at 19:46, Martin Duke via Datatracker <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Martin Duke has entered the following ballot position for
> charter-ietf-iotops-00-17: Block
> 
> 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-iotops/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> BLOCK:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> I hate to do this the second time through, but I'm happy to clear it after the
> telechat after a brief discussion makes it clear I am very wrong...
> 
> I recognize that this WG is more focused on discussion and sharing that more
> standards-directed ones, but I'm a bit uncomfortable with the open-endedness of
> the charter. While there are bounds on the scope, there are no real success
> criteria that we can use to evaluate this WG after a certain period of time.
> 
> Would it be worthwhile to BoF this first to set some basic milestones for this
> WG? Do we already have these milestones in someone's head, that we can write
> down?
> 
> I definitely support formation of a WG with this theme, with a little
> tightening as described above.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Iotops mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iotops