On 1/6/21 10:56 AM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
for cross area reviews all you need are IETF drafts. I doubt that reviewers are interested in digging through the Github issues, PRs, and mailing list discussions.
Well, the more working groups spread their discussions over various media, the harder it is for anyone not really tied up with the WG to contribute usefully. Some people may consider that a feature; I don't.
And in general, the later those who are not "in the loop" submit their input, the less effective that input is. Last Calls are the worst case, but reviewing the drafts are only slightly better. Really you need to get the broad input very early in the WG discussion. But you also need people with broader interests watching the WG throughout its life to make sure their input is taken into consideration.
Regarding "resolving tussles we encourage them, and we produce more and more standards that lack coherence with one another." Note my mail on that topic, seehttps://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/YWTxZEik6gqGod9d5KbAdqNbh3g/ Moving all discussions from Github to the mailing list will have no impact on this issue.
FWIW I disagreed with you about that. I didn't post my disagreement because I thought any ensuing discussion would probably rathole. But briefly: while I think fragmentation in IETF is a problem with respect to IoT and most other topics, for the specific area of IoT IETF has much worse problems - basically a general lack of clue and a lot of widespread assumptions about IoT in IETF which basically aren't true. So IMO IETF is not currently in a great position to have a positive effect on IoT, and I think it will take a lot of work to get there if the organization even wants to try.
Keith
