At Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:12:11 -0500,
Scott Brim wrote:
Eric Rescorla allegedly wrote, On 12/12/08 2:26 PM:
At Sat, 29 Nov 2008 13:15:23 +0100,
Julian Reschke wrote:
I think it would be good to finally enforce the rules for agenda
submissions. For instance, if no agenda for a meeting is published in
time, the meeting shouldn't take place.
I find it incredibly frustrating to be a week out from IETF and
not know what drafts I need to read.
They should be the ones that people have been arguing about for a month
before that, so that it has become clear they need to be discussed in
Perhaps so, but in most WGs I am involved in, plenty of new drafts
show just before the meeting and people ask for discussion time, and
then sometimes people don't show, so in practice trying to follow this
algorithm gets you a very inaccurate list. Moreover, I (and others)
use programmatic tools to extract the list of drafts to review and
then go back and review the mailing list as necessary.
So, all this works far better if the agenda is actually accurate.
Ietf mailing list