Re: WG guidelines DRAFT!

[Fred Baker <[e-mail]>]

>> > Termination of a WG
>> > -------------------
>> > After that task is complete, the group will be disbanded.

>> Sometimes working groups might also go "dormant". They remain in
>> existance, but there is little activity. For example, as a document
>> goes through the progression from Proposed Standard to Draft
>> Standard to Full Standard the working group might periodically "wake
>> up" to monitor the implementations to ensure that the "right things"
>> are being done, to fix problems in the standard that show up with
>> implmentation, and to make the necessary reports to the IESG.

I'm very much in favor of this "dormancy" concept.  Current practice in
the network manageemnt area seems to be to terminate the working group
after IESG acceptance of a document, whether at Proposed, Draft, or
Standard status has been reached. The idea is that "if it needs to be
fixed we'll revive the working group."

I think the normal expectation should be that the WG is shepherding the
document from inception to Full Standard status.

Fred