Re: Remote participants, newcomers, and tutorials

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

 




--On Monday, July 29, 2013 01:37 -0400 Brian Haberman
<brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>...
> One of the things that I ask the Internet Area chairs to do is
> send in a summary of their WG after each IETF meeting.  Those
> summaries generally give folks a good idea of the current
> state of each WG.  I post those summaries on the Internet Area
> wiki.  An alternative that would work as well is to have each
> WG post summaries to their own wikis.  Each WG has a wiki
> available via their Tools page (e.g.,
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/6man/trac/wiki).
> 
> I like seeing the summaries from my chairs and I have gotten
> feedback from participants that they find them quite useful
> for keeping up with WGs that are tangential to their primary
> focus.  I would encourage every WG chair to periodically
> summarize the state of their WG/drafts.

Dave and a few other ancients will recall that there was a time
when there was a requirement for ADs to put together per-meeting
"Area Reports", which went into the minutes.  Unless ADs were
masochists who wanted to do all the work themselves, that pretty
much required that sort of status reports that he and Brian are
talking about.  It also ensured that ADs were aware of what was
going on in all of the WGs for which they were responsible and
that, if there were two ADs in an area, they were talking with
each other.  If those expectations were not met, someone
observing that would presumably have something very concrete to
tell the Nomcom.

In the context of the current discussion, a set of well-written
and frequently-updated area reports could also be a big help to
a newcomer trying to navigate WG names and acronyms.   I agree
that it would probably help to be more descriptive about WG
names rather than looking for things that will make cute
acronyms.  Whether we move in that direction or not, most
newcomers and isolated/remote participants are going to find it
easier to identify an Area of interest than a specific WG.  A
well-written Area Report that includes brief descriptions of the
main focus of each WG along with current status information
would be, IMO, a huge help in matching people and specific
interests.

I think a Wiki or equivalent would be a fine way to maintain
such pages but, given how well we do about keeping benchmarks
and similar information up to date and the advantages deadlines
seem to bring, I'd like to see at least snapshots or the
equivalent in meeting minutes.

    john








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