On Jul 18, 2008, at 1:55 PM, Eliot Lear wrote:
Fred Baker wrote:
On Jul 18, 2008, at 7:50 AM, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
Rather than expanding the number of slots why don't we look at
using the time we have more efficiently.
Let me throw in v6ops as an example. We are very efficient, I think
- we have 10-15 minute discussions on each of a number of drafts in
our time. I would often like to allow a discussion to be longer,
for the same reason that we meet f2f in the first place - we'd like
to get all the opinions on the table and come to some sense of
closure. I am having two meetings in the course of the week and
finding myself rushing discussions along.
My recollection is that you do publicize the agenda well in advance,
and that's a big improvement over many working groups. Here's the
real question, Fred: when you guys go through your meetings, how
much could have been done as a VoD? What I mean by that is how much
discussion occurs on each particular presentation? This might be
something for chairs to measure at Dublin as input into this process.
We tend to have three categories of talks:
- some that could be summarized as "please read my draft"
- discussions resulting from drafts
- groups of talks presenting different aspects of a common theme
An example of the third category is the NAT-PT++ discussion that has
happened in v6ops and is now moving to behave. In IETF-70 I literally
set aside a day (2.5 hours) for a collection of talks and ensuing
microphone discussion on that topic. In IETF-71 we had an extended
discussion on the resulting requirements draft, and in this meeting we
will finalize that discussion and move to WG last call. Another
example is various drafts discussing aspects of IPv6 CPE requirements.
An example of discussions arising from/around drafts is the Teredo
issue. Microsoft published Teredo as a draft sponsored by Mark
Townsley, and subsequently made numerous minor changes to it in
response to field experience. Discussion arose from two quarters
regarding Teredo, and we have had working group discussion of the
issues raised. We now have a new draft on the topic that Dave Thaler
contributed to which likely beings those discussions to rational
closure.
Yes, we have some instances of "please read my draft", and I wish the
v6ops community would make better use of the mailing list. But we do
in fact have pretty wide-ranging discussion as well.
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf