Hi Mark,
At 11:25 02-10-2014, Mark Nottingham wrote:
I have to say I?m concerned about the trend
here; it?s already hard for people who are not
?standards professionals? to go to an IETF meeting.
I want developers and implementers to come to my
meetings, not (just) people who are the
?regulars.? Given the short time blocks
available in an IETF meeting, as well as
uncertainly around scheduling until just before
the meeting (travel scheduling-wise), it seems
like we?re creating ever-more-steep barriers to having them come to meetings.
I understand that the IETF has to stay
"financial". However, I?d ask that we consider a
number of measures to help address this situation:
* Finalising the agenda (far) before it
currently is, so that people can make firm (and
economic) travel plans without blocking out an entire week
The agenda of a session is supposed to be
finalized at least two weeks before. As you are
a working group chair you already know how it
goes. :-) Instead of arguing about why it is
difficult to finalise an agenda I'll ask you how
much notice would the developers and implementers
require for travel scheduling.
* Allowing WGs to hold interim meetings without
being required to meet at the adjacent IETF meetings
To anticipate the objections this will raise ?
yes, I understand that things are structured to
encourage cross-particiption and information
sharing between groups. However, I believe that
in doing so, all we?re really doing is
discouraging participation by people who don?t
have the time or interest in focusing their careers on standards full-time.
The argument for the week-long meeting is that it
is to encourage cross-area participation. Has that happened in practice [1]?
There is a steep barrier to participation (re.
don't have the time to focus full-time). It is
worthwhile to consider whether breaking that
barrier for developers and implementers is worth it.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
1. I mean whether there is cross-area participation from new people.