Re: [wg-d] "Interim Measures"

[Javier <javier@aui.es>]

At 12:55 3/09/99 -0400, Bret A. Fausett wrote:
>Javier wrote:
>
> >(v)  Ask the working group to prepare -as the output of the WG- a report
> >with all the different views that have been presented in the discussions.
> >It is not the output that we would have desired, but it does not look like
> >we can go any further.
>
>Another good option. What would you think about requiring that each
>report contain the following elements?
>
>    (a)  a detailed overview of the proposal;
>
>    (b)  a full analysis of who and what systems
>         might be impacted by the proposal;

The WG cannot go into detailed analysis, it wold require a consulting firm. 
This is what the Public comment period should be for, to have anybosy who 
feels affected publically express their concerns.

>    (c)  the specific steps that would be necessary
>         to take to implement the proposal;
>
>    (d)  the costs and risks, if any, of implementing
>         the proposal and how they would be be borne;

This two issues are, again important, and the more complete a proposal is, 
the more possibilities it has to be accepted, but we should also allow 
points of view to be expressed without implementation plans, otherwise we 
may be cutting away ideas that might be of interest.


>    (e)  a statement of which stakeholders have
>         been consulted about the proposal and what
>         support the proposal has in the various
>         stakeholder communities.

We don't need to make this mandatory, but recommend that it be done, to 
show support for the proposal.

In short, I would post these as recommendations for those who wish to make 
proposals, but without making them mandatory.

Javier

>It might then be helpful to publish the report for a public comment.

Definitely. It should be part of the process.

Javier