[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       cfrg
Subject:    Re: [Cfrg] Time to recharter CFRG as a working group? Was: Re: [secdir] ISE seeks help with some cry
From:       Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell () cs ! tcd ! ie>
Date:       2019-03-24 14:49:53
Message-ID: 3d242ab6-9b86-d86e-0613-1426c3a5838a () cs ! tcd ! ie
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]

[Attachment #4 (multipart/mixed)]

[Attachment #6 (multipart/mixed)]


Hiya,

On 24/03/2019 10:02, StJohns, Michael wrote:
>  I'd expect that
> going through a recharterng exercise to bring in line the documentation
> with the group behavior would lend more credence to the idea that the
> charter should be written for a WG.

I'm not at all convinced that that'd be worthwhile TBH. ISTM that cfrg
is functioning well, so a re-charter seems like it'd not be so useful,
and possibly worse (being distracting). cfrg's credibility comes from
it's output, not it's charter, for me at least.

S.

["0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc" (application/pgp-keys)]
["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
Cfrg mailing list
Cfrg@irtf.org
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]