Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Outreach is important, and welcoming new active contributors
is important, but the dominant consideration is a location that
is convenient and effective for our current active contributors.
Outreach is important to grow the top line revenue, but its more important
value is in broadening and balancing the perspective. Convenience is
important to sustaining participation, but that needs to be balanced by
reality outside the fiber connected large hotel world. As Fred suggested in
the Afghanistan note, there are places in the world that don't have zero
latency/loss fiber paths to the participant's home networks. I can still
hear the screams from the developers 20 years ago when I 'broke' the network
by making them live like all their customers behind a 1/2 second delay.
A dose of reality would impact many of the assumptions people bring to the
standards process. If nothing else it would drive home a reason to be
explicitly clear in text rather than assume everyone knows something because
they all have the same network experiences. We continue facing a routing
crisis, which is a self-inflicted wound, primarily because the
vocal-majority of those deploying the technology have a parochial view
rather than a realistic global view. We continue to fail with a viable QoS
toolset due to a lack of a system-wide architecture which accounts for the
real physical plant issues on a global basis. We continue to see chatty
protocol efforts that fail under the stress of real-world latency and loss.
IMHO at least one meeting every couple of years should be significantly
inconvenient as a way to keep the group grounded.
Description: JPEG image
Ietf mailing list