Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@xxxxxxxxx> 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.
>> 2) permit deeper and faster review of the new work, providing better
>> feedback.
>> 3) reduce presentations from costly in-person meetings
> I am not a fan of making this overly formal, either now,
> during an experimental phase, or if it becomes institutionalized
> in the future.
So no rfc3933 document need... what level of formalism would you like?
> That said, I think some clarity around what's
> intended seems critical and documenting goals would be the
> core piece of that. These three seem to me to capture what
> I'm concerned about, myself (although I might edit the third
> to say "reduce presentations during costly in-person meetings,
> freeing up time and other resources for increased discussion"
I think that's a friendly amendment.
But, I'm not sure what document is amending yet.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
