Hi Loa, the agenda and the material contain both the items for discussion and the time allocated to them. We have discussed with a lot of people (who had different opinions) in order to figure out what would be the most useful questions to ask. At this point, we believe that these (very general) questions are the best we have in order to explore the problem space. If we had more concrete questions that would not be too biased, we would have used them. With respect to documents to be read beforehand, the BoF description is publicly available (as for any other BoF) and it contains a list of RFCs for background reading. We chose not to include John's draft in the agenda because it was posted quite late and because it explores (on purpose) the solution space (as opposed to the problem space). https://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/ As you for sure understand, this is a very controversial topic. So, we do not think we should have the room discuss more-concrete solutions or proposals before discussing the actual (or perceived) problem. Cheers, Gonzalo On 16/07/2018 4:09 PM, Loa Andersson wrote: > Gonzalo, > > I'm still not happy with the posted agenda. In RFC 2418 the guidelines > got WG agendas says: > > "For coordinated, structured WG interactions, the Chair(s) MUST > publish a draft agenda well in advance of the actual session. The > agenda should contain at least: > > - The items for discussion; > - The estimated time necessary per item; and > - A clear indication of what documents the participants will need to > read before the session in order to be well prepared." > > Earlier we have held to this standards when setting up BOFs. Do you > really think the the posted agenda meets the what is indicated above? > > /Loa > > > On 2018-07-16 15:09, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote: >> Hi Loa, >> >> the chair slides are available at (in her email, Heather also sent links >> to the mailing list archives and to the original BoF proposal): >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-rfcplusplus-slides-00 >> >> >> You can find the questions there. As you can see, they are a few very >> generic questions intended to explore the problem space because, so far, >> the discussions on the mailing list have not converged at all. We have >> not seen any consensus so far around whether or not there is a problem >> and, if so, whether or not it is a problem worth solving. >> >> There have been discussions about the solution space as well, but we >> believe we need to discuss the problem space a bit better before jumping >> into designing and discussing concrete solutions. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Gonzalo >> >> >> On 16/07/2018 1:57 PM, Loa Andersson wrote: >>> >>> Folks, >>> >>> With an agenda like this >>> >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/agenda-102-rfcplusplus-00 >>> >>> >>> >>> How am I supposed to prepared the the bof? >>> >>> /Loa >
