From: Simon Josefsson [mailto:simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tue 31/07/2007 11:22 AM
To: Peter Saint-Andre
Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Do you want to have more meetings outside US ?
Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Further, in-person meetings are so second-millennium. How about greater
> use of text chat, voice chat, and video chat for interim meetings? Are
> three in-person meetings a year really necessary if we make use of
> collaborative technologies that have become common in the last 15 years?
I agree with this. Being away from work (and family) decreases my
productivity, and while being present at IETF meetings increases
productivity, I don't think the advantages of being present outweighs
the disadvantages (productivity-wise) for me.
> Even further, how about breaking up the IETF into smaller, more agile
> standards development organizations? We essentially did that with XMPP
> by using the XMPP Standards Foundation for extensions to XMPP rather
> than doing all our work at the IETF (given the large number of XMPP
> extensions, doing all that work at the IETF would have represented a
> denial of service attack on the Internet Standards Process). I see a few
> potential benefits here:
>
> 1. Greater focus on rough consensus and running code.
>
> 2. Fewer bureaucracy headaches.
>
> 3. Reduced workload for our stressed-out IESG members. :)
>
> Just a thought...
I think that is a good idea. The IETF could provide guidelines for
self-organizing group efforts, such as mailing list policy, IPR
templates, bug tracker, conflict resolution systems, etc, and let people
standardize ideas and even experiment with implementations. When such
efforts are successful, the technical work can be guided through the
IETF process (potentially changing the design to fix problems).
I think we've seen several examples of where the IETF has spent
significant amount of energy, ranging from heated discussions to
specification work, on solutions that simply won't fly. It would be
useful if that energy waste could be reduced. Having 'running code' as
a barrier for serious consideration within the IETF may be one approach.
/Simon
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf