Abdussalam,
We used this approach in the SIPPING WG for a number of years and it's really not at all effective. We ended up with lots of WG documents and very slow progress because we didn't have time to resolve real issues at the f2f meetings.
In my experience, a model that allows time for critical issues to be more thoroughly discussed is much more effective. As you note 10 minutes would only allow one to summarize issues and wouldn't allow time for getting WG input to resolve any of those issues.
Regards,
Mary.
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 9:43 PM, Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear IETF WGs' Chairs,I suggest in London that you assign only maximum 10 minutes present per WG draft and maximum 5 minute for individual draft (as limit policy). We need to use more input and have more face2face (F2F) discussion in our meeting. I remember we discussed this before but it will be nice if we know what chairs are thinking before few days of the meeting.Meeting time is money and that we need to improve the use of IETF times within F2F WG discussions and decisions. If an author cannot describe issues of draft in 10 minutes then it will be difficult for the WG listeners to discuss and make decisions within another 10 minutes per item. Please comment.Best wishes,AbdussalamWG Meetings are needed for group interactions and group decisions not individual presentations or individual decisions.