> It seems to me that the fundamental problem is that most of the meeting has not read most of the drafts let alone the latest version under discussion. I think that's a symptom; a more fundamental problem is that WGs are trying to do too many things at once. I've lost track of how many times I've seen a WG a) take valuable meeting time to have a presentation about a draft that is only peripherally related to the WG's current task b) get a show of hands "how many people think this draft should be a WG work item?" c) accept the draft as a WG work item without any discussion of whether doing so will affect the WG's ability to get other work done, or the WG's ability to give adequate attention to the work already accepted Now there are certainly cases in which a WG needs to generate lots of documents in order to fulfill its mission. But to the extent that new work items are identified in the manner described above, it probably indicates a lack of planning. It should be possible to identify early on which topics need to be addressed by WG documents and which ones are either peripheral to the WG's mission or need to wait until the primary deliverables are completed. The initial charter is generally too early to do this, but it would be reasonable for such a work plan to be one of the first deliverables of the initial charter. Once that work plan is established, WGs need to push back on taking on additional work. And the push back probably needs to come from the chairs, or if the chairs won't do it, the ADs. Keith _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf