RE: [113attendees] HotRFC at IETF-113 -- 2nd call for participation

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



It is more like a convenient, centralized place to announce Bar BOFs...

-----Original Message-----
From: 113attendees <113attendees-bounces@xxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of John C Klensin
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 7:14 AM
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: IRTF Discuss <irtf-discuss@xxxxxxxx>; WG Chairs <wgchairs@xxxxxxxx>; 113 attendees <113attendees@xxxxxxxx>; IESG <iesg@xxxxxxxx>; IETF Discussion <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [113attendees] HotRFC at IETF-113 -- 2nd call for participation

**EXTERNAL EMAIL** 



--On Tuesday, March 22, 2022 10:57 +0100 Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>...
> I tried the HotRFC last time, via gather.town, with the  recorded 
>videos and questions on the floor.  It's entirely a  different thing, 
>and I think that actually, it is usefully  complementary.

> I will note that *DISPATCH is also become more of a thing.
> 
> While previously we often had a 1st non-WG forming BOF followed by ML 
> and charter discussions, we now have:
>       HotRFC -> *DISPATCH -> WG-forming BOF

> That's okay with me, but it goes to the RFC2026 is wrong debate, and 
> we should probably tell people about this more explicitely.  That 
> doesn't mean we have to freeze this
> process: but we do need to tell people it's happening.

I actually don't think it interacts much with 2026 although I do wonder whether how much introducing additional steps into the process --whether they involve 

	a non-WG-forming BOF -> ML discussion -> charter
	proposal -> a WG-forming BOF -> more discussion and
	charter revision -> chartering

or

	discussion, *DISPATCH, -> WG-forming BOF -> charter
	discussion -> chartering

(with the initial discussion in the second case taking many
forms) -- is contributing to general delays and some people's sense that it is impossible to get real work done in the IETF in any efficient and timely way.

While, as work-proposing mechanisms, the tone is certainly different (especially along the fear of being attacked dimension you mention), I'm not sure whether HotRFC is significantly different from the BarBOFs of yesteryear.

    john
 




--
113attendees mailing list
113attendees@xxxxxxxx
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/113attendees__;!!Emaut56SYw!ns3s2cRVvygXRTSlQ4Jl0eVwnu3vQnQTmodGTvmEhTPw34vtRcS6pUwM9FAO0TV-8g$ 





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux