|
On 12/26/2015 03:36 PM, Abdussalam
Baryun wrote:
I disagree. Though some amount of cross-area review does happen at meetings (and if it weren't for meetings, there would be considerably less), there are several problems with relying on meetings for cross-area review. The first is that the meetings tend to be scheduled in area tracks without much regard for the potential for one WG's output to cause problems in a different area. The second is that the way we conduct meetings is itself hostile to cross-area review. Though people from other areas do bring up concerns at meetings, there is a strong tendency to view those people as "outsiders" who "haven't done their homework" (perhaps because they don't use the same technical terms as the WG participants, and/or they just learned of the problem the group was causing a few minutes before and haven't had the time to read the group's dozen internet-drafts). And those outsiders are also viewed as taking up too much precious meeting time which could otherwise be devoted to more PowerPoint presentations. (Which is a related problem - IETF working groups are producing too many documents for the number of participants, resulting in many documents of low quality and/or low relevance which IESG mostly feels obligated to publish. And IETF treats that as a sign of success). Keith |