Re: [Rum] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on charter-ietf-rum-00-02: (with COMMENT)
Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Wed, 10 April 2019 16:09 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
X-Original-To: rum@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rum@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 137551203C1; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 09:09:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SpyQB_6ZpFVs; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 09:09:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de [IPv6:2a01:488:42:1000:50ed:8223::]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00EB51203B7; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 09:09:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ewa_guest_internet_sthlm_nat2.ericsson.net ([192.176.1.97] helo=[10.148.125.253]); authenticated by wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1hEFmn-00014x-2a; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 18:09:17 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.8\))
From: Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJJMRXfK1W+=3EtwXrGZ3tBhMc=fSbU79r4ZBhDu9hn-KQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 18:09:16 +0200
Cc: rum@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, rum-chairs@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <606CEF44-EBBC-4E00-9A66-58A812BF2774@kuehlewind.net>
References: <155490930181.9012.10425075507990091132.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CALaySJJMRXfK1W+=3EtwXrGZ3tBhMc=fSbU79r4ZBhDu9hn-KQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.8)
X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;ietf@kuehlewind.net;1554912562;88853e65;
X-HE-SMSGID: 1hEFmn-00014x-2a
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rum/K4Uc2IvkDl3J14hhORjM6VrvUuo>
Subject: Re: [Rum] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on charter-ietf-rum-00-02: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: rum@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Relay User Machine <rum.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rum>, <mailto:rum-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rum/>
List-Post: <mailto:rum@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rum-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rum>, <mailto:rum-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 16:09:24 -0000
In transport we have the tsvwg which is chartered to catch up this kind of working and provide a place for the community to meetings and discuss. I guess at this point it doesn’t matter anymore but it saves you the overhead of working on a charter and run it though the IETF and IESG process. > On 10. Apr 2019, at 17:30, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote: > >> I still find it a bit excessive to create a 8-month working group for one document > > Really? Why? > > I think it's a perfect way to handle things, creating a short-lived, > tightly focused working group for this sort of thing. It's far better > than AD-sponsoring a document, which almost always gets inadequate > community review. We've used such working groups very effectively in > the ART area (and its predecessors). > > Barry > >
- [Rum] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on charter-i… Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker
- Re: [Rum] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on chart… Barry Leiba
- Re: [Rum] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on chart… Mirja Kuehlewind