Re: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-palet-ietf-meeting-venue-selection-criteria-04.txt

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

 



From: "Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@xxxxxxxx>
At 2:28 PM -0500 1/19/06, Richard Shockey wrote:
It's a classic example of the current IETF fashion for process over substance.

Fully agree. What is the justification for this becoming an RFC?

Well, backing up slightly ...

How much of our process stuff (including existing BCPs) really needs to be published as an RFC?

Some does, I suppose, but "never changes" doesn't seem like the model we should search for on venue selection (the venue selection model used for the first 10 IETF meetings probably wouldn't have even booked us into Minneapolis, much less Adelaide!).

Having said this, I hope the IAOC does find this document useful input (because if they don't, people have sure been wasting zeros and ones on THIS list...

Thanks,

Spencer


_______________________________________________

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]