At 07:38 AM 3/3/2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: >Under the IETF role it is very easy of WG chairs to ignore >minority participants of large communities. I've come to the conclusion - possibly wrong - that you're lacking some basic understanding in the operational model of the IETF. Unlike most other standards bodies, the IETF tries to get good technical contributions from smart technical people, not based on voting status of their company or country. If you have a good idea, it makes no difference whether you're from the US and working for a big company, or from Nigeria and working for a two person consultancy. The dual of that is that the IETF does not attempt to level the playing field by imposing rules which gives "minority participants of large communities" (or for that matter any other participant) a voice they didn't earn with their technical contributions. This is most specifically, a peer-reviewed community and good reviews, clear technical arguments, and a willingness to contribute to the process will lead to more people listening to you. I *am* aware that various companies, and perhaps even some countries, have tried to change or work around that - sometimes by venue changing, sometimes by abusing the process. But, for the most part, a good technical idea will win over a mediocre one. So I would restate your comment along the lines as I understand them: "It is sometimes difficult for WG chairs to ignore out-of-order, or irrelevant comments from any participant, but they need to do so to progress the work of the IETF". Mike