Margaret,
The words I hate most when I am in a WG meeting are these:
"take it to the mailing list"
That is usually short for "we can't agree in person so we'll now continue to disagree by email". Debate has been shut off, and usually prematurely because there is something else on the agenda. I'd rather that never happen. I think it's fair to specify the parameters for a decision and then go to the mailing list so that people could evaluate different solutions based on those parameters, but simply blowing off a topic because the group cannot agree is a failure of leadership.
So, in answer to the question you asked Dave, I would agree with him about [1] and [2] in his message. I don't fully understand [3]. I would go a bit further to say that the agendas should be approved by an AD. Why? Because it forces the AD to pay attention to the group. No group should run on auto-pilot. Any AD that cannot do this with little or no effort, should spend more time with the WG in question. The AD gets to approve the order. If agenda bashing shows that the chair missed something, then there was a failure on the mailing list, and corrective action should be taken to fix the problem.
I would not penalize a WG for not getting to the end of its agenda. That, in fact, is a call for an interim meeting, perhaps.
I would add one more thing. We need whiteboards, ones with erasers. it used to be that we had them years and years ago. Being able to draw out solutions and list and reorder problems is a good thing.
So, a not so fictitious example:
The ISMS WG is currently struggling to choose between one of three architectures for integrated SNMP security models. A call for consensus has been issued, and thus far there is none. The reason there is none is that people do not yet agree on the underlying requirements, IMHO. This is all good fodder for an in person meeting. If neither mailing list nor in person meeting can solve the problem, then the AD needs to step in and do something.
Prior to the meeting there should be a short summary of the issues, pro and con for each alternative, as well as proposed evaluation criteria. The meeting may be a good venue to expand or contract those criteria.
Eliot
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf