On Mar 18, 2013, at 7:42 AM, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Seriously though, I am roughly in the same camp as Seiichi. The real introduction of someone into the IETF is mostly about finding discussion partners around the reason why the person came to the IETF to begin with. Most of the time these would be peers within a working group. Like-minded vendors, customers or researchers. Not everyone who comes to the IETF for the first time is a beginner, they may for instance be established engineers on their fields, and just coming to the IETF to accomplish a goal. We discuss very interesting topics at the IESG and IAB, but I think the more direct way to introduce someone to the IETF "network" is to connect the person with others who work in the same topic. And maybe create some real co-operation between those people, building additional reasons for the person to continue to join our meetings. I quoted Jari's entire paragraph for context, but my comment is in reference to "Not everyone who comes to the IETF for the first time is a beginner, they may for instance be established engineers on their fields, and just coming to the IETF to accomplish a goal. " This is important. We tend to think of the IETF as a thing. I'm not sure it is, anymore. It's a collection of somewhat related working groups. A lot of new attendees I have known, or talked to enough to understand why they are here, came here to get something specific done. They are not newbies in their field, and they don't come here to work in the IETF in general. Typically this means they are interested in one or two working groups, unless the thing they want to get done spans multiple interdependent groups. (If that's the case, then they've got their work cut out for them unless they are exceptionally good at organizing strangers.) And they have very busy real-world jobs, and are sparing all the time they can just to make it to a couple of working groups. I expect they are quite bemused when (and if) they sit through a plenary open mike session, when we all go on about the IETF in general. A few of these people will stay around and become leaders in their area of interest, and maybe the IETF in general. Most won't. And that's probably okay--or at least the best we can expect. I think this means we should closely consider the goals of a mentoring effort. Is it to help them navigate the IETF structure, personalities, and immune system to get something done? Is it to help them become the next generation of IETF leaders? I suspect those two goals do not lend themselves to the same approach.