RE: Working Group chartering

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

 



Eric,

--- [SNIP ---
--> IMHO, *way* too many I*E*TF work groups get chartered based on
--> an idea. We then spend tons of resources on figuring out if the
--> idea will work. We produce lots of half-baked documents with 
--> little basis in working code.  Then folks try implementing 
--> what's been spec'ed, find it doesn't work, but then find a ton 
--> of resistance to change, because the specs are three years old 
--> and "we don't want to break draft-mumble-05 implementations."
--> 
--> If something is an idea, let's make it politically acceptable 
--> for the "work" to be done in the I*R*TF first.
--> 
--- [SNIP] ---

I think this is a gross mischaraterization of current practice in
the IETF generally - however many exceptions we might find.

Usually - at least among those of us that work for a living - we
would not bring something to the IETF unless we were already in
the process of implementing it and we have been encouraged by our
employers (or - indirectly - by our customers) to bring it to the
IETF.

When people bring ideas to the IETF that "seem like a good thing"
but aren't practical or implementable at the current time, they
are usually encouraged to take those ideas to the IRTF.

--
Eric

_______________________________________________

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]