Re: More on the closing of the OpenPGP WG

[Derek Atkins <derek@xxxxxxxxx>]

Ian G <iang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Derek Atkins wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I sat down with Sam, Tim, and Pasi yesterday to talk about this.
>> Basically, it's still possible to have a "standards track" document
>> without a working group.  They still need to go through an IETF
>> Last Call but the AD can sponsor the draft (instead of having a
>> WG Group).  So long as the drafts are not very contentious (which
>> MOST of our proposed work is), we can just continue to drafts
>> as individual submissions and an AD (Tim?) could sponsor that
>> once we have rough consensus on this list.
>
>
> That sounds fine to me.  Is the only reason for a WG that we have to
> have an open forum if there is contention?

I don't think that's the only reason..  It's mainly provides a means
to gauge consensus before it gets to the whole IETF, and provides a
means to streamline the process so it's not all on the AD's shoulders.

-derek
-- 
       Derek Atkins                 617-623-3745
       derek@xxxxxxxxx             www.ihtfp.com
       Computer and Internet Security Consultant