Re: Reducing IETF scope in response to market forces

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hiya,

(With homenet co-chair hat on...)

On 12/05/2019 07:33, Dave Taht wrote:
>  To avoid howling
> here I'll skip mentioning the dozens I have on my list, and just pick
> on one that I was present at the founding of, homenet.
> 
> Market forces have completely shifted out from under that working
> group. No serious vendor
> support ever appeared. The vendors most affected, never showed up.
> Specs exist, but code doesn't. There was a very good preso on all this
> at homenet 104. 

Yes, homenet WG participants have handled these issues
explicitly and (I think) very well, so describing this
one a zombie would be incorrect. Rather, it's a WG whose
participants are trying to address and not ignore the
issue of how relevant the planned work continues to be.

> The members of that working group hummed
> overwhelmingly to recharter at ietf 104. 

The people in the room hummed that way yes. My co-chair
recently started the discussion on the list to try to
confirm or refute that conclusion. (Personally I think
hums like that are likely to be a bit too positive for
"do something" so I figure this needs more than just
not disagreeing with that hum on the list.)

It'd be great if interested folks got involved in the
discussion on the homenet list.

On the general points: I'd be for reducing the number
of WGs that have formal sessions at IETF f2f meetings.
I'm not fussed about the overall number of WGs that
appear to exist - I'm fine if the IESG handle that
however they want. I'd not be in favour of reducing
the scope of the IETF in terms of the breadth of topics
that are considered in-scope.

Cheers,
S.


> After that, however, several
> core members of the group expressed to me that it would be best to
> shutter it entirely and attempt to move the core to an org that was
> actually focused on running code, more than further specifications and
> further wading through ietf processes, and thus, meet elsewhere,
> entirely.

Attachment: 0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux