Re: IETF Plenary Discussions

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

 



Individuals taking a long time to talk either on the mike or responding on the stage :-) is one problem.

At times I wonder if a bigger issue is how long certain topics are discussed. I'm sorry but I just can't get excited about labeling of standards track RFCs, or even about how to get early review from the IESG on documents that advance. The issues are the same as they are for all other documents. If we want early review, get the document to the IESG and have us provide feedback in some documented manner.

I'm curious why we end up discussing this stuff in the administrative plenaries. I do not believe we have run out of other things to discuss. For instance, we could have talked about the direction of the v6 transition work in the face of an ever growing set of proposals only slightly different from each other. Or how the IESG handled some BOFs, or the controversies that we have in a number of working groups. Or how the IETF should organize work around some emerging new topics.

Did we NOT discuss these topics because we had nothing to say, or because we had been exhausted by the standards ladder discussion?

Jari

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]