Dave Crocker wrote:
I agree that interim WG meetings would be useful, but here is a
further proposal:
There are quite a few really good ideas for improvements to IETF
productivity. The problem with taking a particular suggestion and then
adding others to it will be that nothing gets considered in detail and
nothing gets done.
The original suggestion was quite specific:
Take the kinds of funds spent by meeting hosts and, instead, have
them become meeting sponsors, with meeting venue logistics handled by
the IETF itself, separately. In return for meeting sponsorship, give
the sponsor various marketing opportunities as the meeting, similar to
what hosts currently enjoy.
In other words, I am suggesting a single, conceptually small change
to the current model. Its purpose is to permit vastly better meeting
planning than we currently can achieve, due to the delays inherent in
having meeting hosts.
This is much closer to the model that most IEEE and ACM conferences use,
and it works well. It does, however, require a persistent organization
with legal and financial oversight, and who has sufficient pockets to
bear deficits occasionally.
Joe
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf