Ted,
On 2019-02-25 23:30, Ted Lemon wrote:
On Feb 25, 2019, at 6:11 AM, Loa Andersson <loa@xxxxx
<mailto:loa@xxxxx>> wrote:
My advice would be to scratch the agenda, start over, leave the
experiment out and optimize to avoid conflicts!
How would they do that? What information do they have now that they
didn’t have before they published the agenda?
I didn't say there is new any new information AFTER the agenda was
posted. The new info is the preliminary agenda itself! I you look at
MPLS and LSR meeting across the lunch slot on Wednesday, we have some
key participants of the MPLS wg, required to be in the LSR wg meeting.
I'm really unhappy about the current agenda.
What I said was that IESG should refocus in the light of the many
conflicts and redo the agenda with the objective to avoid conflicts.
/Loa
I ask because in fact, this agenda is the least conflicted one /for
me/ that I have seen in a long time. I’m /really/ happy with the
current agenda, and can really only lose from a re-do. This is not to
say that a re-do is not the right thing to do. What I’m saying is that
the fact that a couple of people have griped about conflicts and about
an over-full agenda is /not data./ It is /anecdata/.
As Stewart has said, if we want to do better at this, we need /data,
/not /anecdata./
/
/
--
Loa Andersson email: loa@xxxxx
Senior MPLS Expert
Bronze Dragon Consulting phone: +46 739 81 21 64
