[ipv6-wg] Proposal for new charter: Version 2

Shane,

Please see below for a few comments in my role as a private individual
contributor to this working group:

I think that this version captures the comments on the list quite well
and I can support this version as-is.

I do think that a tiny bit of polishing could make the charter say the
same thing but make it a bit smoother worded and professional
looking, especially for people who read our charter but who are not
directly involved in the industry as a network operator:

On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 04:09:55AM +0100, Shane Kerr wrote:
> IPv6 is the next-generation IP protocol. 

I don't think there should be a '-' between 'next' and 'generation'.

> The IPv6 working group exists to promote IPv6 adoption.

I used the word 'advance' instead of 'promote' in my text as I was
looking for a different word than 'further' but that had a similar
meaning. I don't think there is anything wrong with the word 'promote'
but I have a somewhat ambivalent attitude towards
'promoters/marketers/sales people'. Is there another alternative like
'advance' that doesn't cause such associations (what about
'encourages') ?

> The working group activities may be anything useful in helping people
> to deploy IPv6, and to manage IPv4/IPv6 co-existence. 

The core of this sentence just sounds a bit unpolished:
'may be anything useful in helping people to deploy IPv6', 

In my earlier proposed text I replaced that with:

'cover anything that facilitates the deployment of IPv6'

making it

'The working group activities cover anything that facilitates the
 deployment of IPv6,'

I am sure that there are many other options. Another one could be:

The working group discusses all topics that stimulate the deployment
of IPv6 and that support the co-existence of IPv6 and IPv4.

The current sentence just doesn't read that well.

In addition, as written,

> * Sharing deployment experiences
> * Discussing operational issues

are not the same but end up being the same thing in practise.

I would prefer a bit stronger wording than just 'discuss' to support
Geert Jan's case and to encourage ourselves to actually do something
about a problem instead of just discussing it.

> The working group will co-operate within the networking industry and 

I prefer the spelling for cooperate without a '-' (just like the
'cooperation working group' spells the word ;-)). 

Note that the list of comments sounds quite long since I tried to give
a few alternatives but that most issues brought up are fairly
straightforward to fix.

I hope this helps,

David Kessens
---