Re: Adding parallelism? (was Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications and Infrastucture Area)

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

 





--On 22. september 2005 10:03 +0200 Pekka Nikander <pekka.nikander@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Have we (== the IETF) ever seriously considered splitting this
organisation "horizontally"?  That is, instead of having one IETF
worrying about all from sub-IP issues to (some) applications, have
two ones, one more focusing on issues at the IP layer and directly
above and below it, and the other one on issues "above" that?

Many times. The Standard Next Message is that:

- the people who have clues in both areas are very valuable to the organization, because it's exactly them who provide the "cross-area review" that we're so proud of - if we split it, these people will either go to 6 meetings a year or stop coming to one set

That said, I've argued at times that we should try some time to have at least one meeting "split" - where different groups of groups meet in different places. However, experimentation like this is significantly in conflict with the ideal of planning meetings 2 years ahead.

                 Harald


Attachment: pgpYssk9ofLnV.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

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