Re: to pitch or not to pitch, IETF attendance costs

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

 



On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 03:39:57PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
> That implies we have to work out what the goals are.
> Let me take a stab at this:
> 
> 1) make it easier to bring new work to the IETF.

+1

> 2) permit deeper and faster review of the new work, providing better
>    feedback.

+1

> 3) reduce presentations from costly in-person meetings

+1 (Except, again, for BoFs, because they are very much about marketing
    new work, and they can't be expected to have a virtual interim.

    And, of course, SAAG should continue to have one presentation.)

> It would be nice to have a before/after analysis.  A key metric I'd want to
> have is time between individual-00 draft and adoptedwg-00 document.
> A different metric would be how many non-authors are engaged prior to
> and during adoption call.

It will take at least a year to demonstrate that your proposals improve
these metrics.  I'm OK with that.

Nico
-- 




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

  Powered by Linux