Re: [ldapext] draft charter comment

[Michael Ströder <[e-mail]>]

William Brown wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-10-27 at 01:07 +0100, Howard Chu wrote:
>> William Brown wrote:
>>> Second, I think we need a section in there about future work? We 
>>> seem to list only "lets clean things" as a group, but shouldn't
>>> we say " our charter is to clean up the draft standards and then
>>> continue working on curation of new standards"?>>
>> I think nobody at the time was going to be so ambitious as to work
>> on new standards. ;)>
> Better have it and not need it, than need it and not have it? 

Note that we have to prove to the area director that we are able to form
a WG which is capable of getting real work done. And AFAIK the WGs are
not meant to exist forever. We can recharter later to add whatever we
want to do. But IMO we should do this *after* getting current work done.

Also note you're free to post individual I-Ds at any time and the WG can
decide at any time whether those get WG work items or not.

To me it seems this whole IETF process is pretty flexible. Therefore we
don't have to consider the future now.

So for now let's stick to most important work items and see whether we
manage to get those done.

Ciao, Michael.