Clarifying the basis for new work in CCAMP

["Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>]

Hi,

I have had some email seeking clarification of the basis upon which we
will construct new CCAMP drafts if/when we have new milestones within our
charter.

The text accompanying the milestones was intended to fuel the discussion
and is not proposed as part of the charter. It included the words...

>    Existing drafts
>    are referenced to indicate that work is already in progress -
>    this is not intended to provide a complete list of existing
>    drafts.

My covering email said...

> - Why isn't my I-D also cited as input material?
>   No insult intended. The current list is simply there to
>   show the ADs that work is already in progress. All I-Ds
>   will be used as input.

To clarify this still further:

The CCAMP WG drafts will be refined and submitted to the IESG by the WG.

The milestones are:
a. To have a WG draft on the subject
b. To submit that draft to the IESG

This doesn't prohibit other WG drafts near the subject, but I would assume
that we only have one draft that is precisely on target.

We will obviously need to select drafts to use as the foundations of the
WG drafts. This choice will be made on a case by case basis. In some cases
an existing draft will be used; in others we will need to start a new
draft because no pre-existing work exists, or because we need to combine
two or more existing drafts.

The point, however, is to build a WG draft out of the working group, and
then refine the draft until it is submitted.

All material is taken as input and filtered through WG consensus.

I hope this clarifies.

Thanks,
Adrian