Mark,
On 28-Nov-24 09:08, Mark Nottingham wrote:
People's responses to the plenary session -- which they also perceive as a waste of time -- suggest that your view isn't widely shared.
That is why putting ALLDISPATCH (including GENDISPATCH) into the main plenary seems like a good idea - it would actually reduce the time "wasted" on plenary sessions as well as exposing the dispatch discussion.
And yet, I think many of those people who perceive plenary time as wasted would have complaints about the IETF process. That's like not voting in an election but complaining about the result.
Perhaps it would be more fruitful to address the underlying problem -- that we have to pursue our work in parallel, because the organisation is significantly overcommitted. You feel that the GENAREA work is important enough to guarantee it doesn't have conflicts, but others are likely to feel differently -- both in the importance of the GENAREA work and in the importance of their own interests.
I agree. Yet we have ~128 WGs and ~825 adopted drafts and those numbers seem to be roughly constant over time. Where should we discuss that issue except in plenary?
Regards
Brian
Cheers,
On 28 Nov 2024, at 6:19 AM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 28-Nov-24 04:37, Michael Richardson wrote:
Rob Wilton \(rwilton\) <rwilton=40cisco.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> One proviso is that the charter for GENAREA needs to be very clear
> about what small things it can take on, and what things really need
> wider community consensus first. And I don’t really mean on the size
> of the work, but the potential impact of the work on the community or
> the standards process.
It seems you are just re-creating GENDISPATCH with a new name.
If you want to take on "small" things, then just say something like:
"GENDISPATCH can also do small efforts, as determined by the IESG"
we don't need to anticipate everything, or litigate everything twice in
charter than then again.
====
I prefer to keep GENDISPATCH with the other dispatch work.
I think it's MORE IMPORTANT than the other dispatch work that it be
conflict-free.
Yes. One of the frustrations about working on IETF process issues is
that most of the people affected by them don't help fix them. We need
many more participants to take an interest in process work, and a specific
advantage of having GENDISPATCH as part of a plenary dispatch session is
that more people will be in the room. It is *not* a waste of their time.
Brian
--
Alldispatch mailing list -- alldispatch@xxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to alldispatch-leave@xxxxxxxx
--
Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
