Re: IETF 65 BOF Announcement: Digital Identity Exchange (DIX)

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

 





My immediate concern is that we know better than to conduct this sort of BOF in this sort of manner.

What sort of manner is that, Dave?  That's a serious question.  There is
an open mailing list on which discussion has been taking place since the
Vancouver meeting.

Sorry. I missed the ietf-wide announcement of that list, made long enough ago to permit extended online discussion, as a lead-in to this BOF, to ensure consideration from a wide variety of perspectives.

That discussion would permit the BOF to take place with enough community history to make it possible to have a productive BOF. (I thought I covered that concern in my previous note.)

Anyhow, please point me at the announcement, since the mere existence of a list that few know about does not mean much. (Based on the list archive, and the comments emerging now, I am not the only one who missed that announcement.)


 There is still a month to continue discussion before

You think that one month is enough time for meaningful, pre-BOF discussion of a topic like this?

You have a very different sense of the IETF's metabolic rate, for complex topics, than I do.

As I noted in my previous message, there is quite a strong basis for believing that it will be very, very difficult to get useful community convergence on goals and approaches.

For example, please explain to me why the prediction I made about the likely course of the upcoming BOF is inaccurate. Or please explain why such a course is productive.


For what it's worth, I consider shooting down an idea to be one
potential outcome of a successful BOF.

Scott, no. What I am trying to point out to you is that there will not be a reasonable basis for making *any* sort of assessment.

All we are going to get is the usual confusion of strong opinions, without any considered dialogue. It has become the norm for IETF BOF's, on any interesting, difficult topic.


watching the list discussions in isolation.  I approved this BOF to give
the rest of the IETF community a chance to see what's being considered.
If it's not ready for prime time, the proponents need to hear that --
but they need to have the chance to hear that opinion.

In my previous notes I have tried to explain why a "start from scratch" approach for a BOF is just plain wasteful. That wastefulness has been demonstrated enough times that one would expect us to learn the lesson.

d/

--

Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
<http://bbiw.net>

_______________________________________________

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]