At 16:14 14/07/2006, Scott W Brim wrote:
On 07/14/2006 10:01 AM, Fred Baker allegedly wrote: > Once upon a time, > the guideline I followed was that about 1/6 of the IETF was from Europe, > a smattering was from elsewhere, and the lion's share was from the US, > so I scheduled a meeting every other year in Europe, the odd one in > random places, and the lion's share in the US. Those statistics are > essentially meaningless now. Why are they meaningless? The IETF should overwhelmingly meet where the participants are, wherever that might be. I still like your algorithm.
May be the IETF should also look for other working methods which would permit to involve more people more pertinently while needing less meetings. The ITEF matter is technical, the target is to produce document which will be _read_ by engineers from all over the world. Why would this necessarily call for people to meet? May be the main problem of the IETF documents is that they are from a culture of people having f2f meetings to tune their positions, while their users/readers do not. I think it is a common problem to many organizations. But that of all the technical organizations/SSDO the IETF is probably the best suited to address that problem, because it has the competence, experience, and a significant part of participants being on their own expense account. jfc
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf