On 29/07/16 16:20, MH Michael Hammer (5304) wrote: > I'm not asserting that IETF needs to bring cycle times down to days, > weeks or months I think months would actually be a good goal, for some bits of work, and is doable in some cases. At present that does require quite a special kind of work and for involved folks to be very familiar with IETF stuff. > but my sense is that there is a brokenness to the > process. Well, not quite "the process" but more I think "how we operate the process" - a lot of delays are not due to the formal process but down to disagreements between smart people who are quite good at disagreeing subtly and also a lack of time to do this kind of work. > Slowness to generate the standards, slowness in adoption of > standards, etc. There are no magic fixes but there surely are ways > of reducing drag. I agree. And I think we should try get better at that despite pretty much every single process-change suggestion attracting some opposition from somewhere. (Maybe we should have a competition to see if anyone can come up with a universally supported process change for the IETF:-) S.
<<attachment: smime.p7s>>