ned+ietf-822(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com wrote on 29.07.04 in
<01LD1S0HX57M00005R(_at_)mauve(_dot_)mrochek(_dot_)com>:
Kai Henningsen wrote:
I found out about the datatracker about a week ago, either from
something here or possibly on ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org - I don't
remember exactly.
It may have been discussed at length on various lists, but that
obviously wasn't enough except for someone who was following one of
those lists at that time. Which, it seems, didn't include me, or Bruce,
or persumable a large number of other people.
It's certainly been discussed in some of the plenaries. Some ADs also
make a point of letting you know about it when your I-D gets to the
point of being tracked.
And also during apps area sessions, if memory serves. I'm sure it has been
covered in WG chair training as well, although I haven't been there to see
it.
Document authors receive automatic notification of tracker state changes
for their documents. This may have been extended to WG chairs by now - I
think that was the plan some time back.
It was also announced on the main IETF announcement list back on 4-Nov-2002.
Discussion has subsequently occured on that list and elsewhere.
Which pretty much proves my point. It explicitely gets told to a small
number of people, and was discussed in a small number of places.
An IETF participant, you're supposed to be on the main IETF announcement list.
The list has very intentionally been restructured to facilitate having everyone
on it at least twice (first to split off the IETF discussions from the
announcments, which people shouldn't be required to see, and then to split off
draft announcements, which should be an atom feed anyhow...).
As a result, one should *expect* the general public to be uninformed.
I expect the general public to be completely uninformed. I have higher
expectations of IETF participants.
Ned