Re: [MLS] recharter text

I think we've got enough specific items on the list to keep us busy for a
while.  As Paul says, rechartering is (pretty) cheap, so let's tick off
some of the items we have and then we can add more.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 4:42 PM Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> wrote:

> On Tue, 28 Nov 2023, Sean Turner wrote:
>
> >> On Nov 10, 2023, at 14:59, Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 11:29 AM Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi! As discussed at the IWTF 118 session, the revised charter text can
> be found here:
> >>> https://github.com/mlswg/wg-materials/tree/main/wg-charter
> >>>
> >>> Richard has already provided extension related text, i.e., listing the
> extensions we are going to work on:
> >>> https://github.com/mlswg/wg-materials/pull/14.
> >>> Please let us know here or in the repo whether you agree with the list
> of extensions. And, note that doing work on other extensions is likely
> going to require a recharter so let’s try to get this list right.
> >>
> >> Does a saving clause of "such other extensions as the working group
> >> consensus deems advisable" sound good?  While I see from the record
> >> EKR wanted some scoping, I think having an explicit list of things to
> >> work on and then others is good enough.
> >
> > I am concerned that somebody on the IESG might think of this as a blank
> check. I also really want to see if we can work through the existing set of
> extensions and then maybe recharter to something a little more loose.
>
> And by somebody, Sean specifically means me, your friendly neighbourhood
> AD :)
>
> Rechartering is cheap, so these clauses are not needed. And it allows
> (read: forces) the WG a bit more structure to complete older ideas before
> moving onto the next new shiny thing. Because, SQUIRREL!
>
> Paul
>
> _______________________________________________
> MLS mailing list
> MLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mls
>