Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process]

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

 



>> Putting arbitrary time limits on will hurry things up but it will not
>> produce higher quality results.
>
> Ok, so do you agree, that if who holds the work, at least should tell
> us HOW long he is holding or what is the time PLAN. Do you think
> working without plan is efficient and gives good quality.

We generally rely on judgment in this regard, not on time limits and
deadlines.  We do sometimes set deadlines (milestones in charters,
timeouts on last calls, fixed telechat dates, alerts when things take
too long), but we also give leeway (we know how solid charter
milestones aren't, and no one will ignore important, useful input just
because it came in after last call).

Someone is always responsible for determining when a discussion is no
longer productive (shepherds, chairs, responsible ADs), and someone is
responsible for moving things forward.  Reminders to those who are
responsible, telling them that things seem to be dragging, are fine.
Strict time limits are generally not how we prefer to work.

Barry




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