Stephen,
" I expect that there are more and more people like myself who
are drawn in for some aspect of the work, rather than a broad
interest in internet. "
Humm... apparently you are alone ;-)
but from my point of view this translates a real issue... how
can we reconcile people with narrow focused scope with the
global IETF philosophy understand the impact on the INTERNET,
IETFer first think to the global consistency and ubiquity of
the IP protocols; this translates IMHO some mis-understanding
of the IETF in general, its WG efforts and results impact on
the INTERNET.
more practically i think that pre-agenda are going in the
direction you point out but i am completely OPPOSED to that:
because how can we determine the discussion time we would
need if we don't know 1) the number of submitted I-Ds and
the issue they could raise on mailing list 2) how they can
impact each other so for instance it might be better to put
WG X meeting before WG Y meeting (cross-WG discussion are
paramount importance in the current INTERNET environment)
see we in Minneapolis,
- dimitri.
Keith Moore wrote:
As the scope of the work in IETF increases, I expect that there are
more and more people like myself who are drawn in for some aspect of
the work, rather than a broad interest in internet.
And what this means is that there are more and more people in IETF
who are not aware of the broader impact of their work on other
Internet areas. So we have more and more groups working at cross-
purposes to one another.
Travel budgets are the least of our problems. What we really need
to do is stop using narrowly focused WGs as a method of avoiding
discussions between parties that have conflicting interests.
Keith
-
This message was passed through
ietf_censored(_at_)carmen(_dot_)ipv6(_dot_)cselt(_dot_)it, which
is a sublist of ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org(_dot_) Not all messages are passed.
Decisions on what to pass are made solely by Raffaele D'Albenzio.
dimitri.papadimitriou.vcf
Description: Card for Dimitri Papadimitriou