Re: IETF Attendance by continent

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

 



The numbers are very interesting -- thank you Bob, Donald and others who did the work to find out what the situation really is.

I would like to repeat my comment from the plenary that there are many different ways to crunch the numbers. You can look at participants, weigh any particular subset of them, or look at contributors in some other way. The bottom line is that all of us can select the statistics that support our preferred distribution :-)

For contributor statistics, RFC publication author set (http://www.arkko.com/tools/recrfcstats/d-contdistr.html) is probably not the one that we should look at. It lags behind the work in the IETF due to RFC Editor and IESG delays. It is also biased because some set of people have learned how to use the IETF and can publish RFCs more easily than others.

The draft publication author set is probably more representative (http://www.arkko.com/tools/stats/d-contdistr.html), but also does not account for people who are only observing for now but would like to write specifications.

The attendee stats are biased according to where we held the meeting last, though as Bob and Donald have shown we can try to eliminate this bias. In any case, attendance statistics include tourists as well as people who do or plan to contribute. How should we weigh tourists?

Pick your poison.

I think we should not over-analyze the selection process too much. I support 1-1-1 because its a simple model, it feels right, and because I believe general IETF participation is headed towards the 1-1-1 model even if we are not there by all measures yet.

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]