At 16:14 14/07/2006, Scott W Brim wrote:
On 07/14/2006 10:01 AM, Fred Baker allegedly wrote:
> Once upon a time,
> the guideline I followed was that about 1/6 of the IETF was from Europe,
> a smattering was from elsewhere, and the lion's share was from the US,
> so I scheduled a meeting every other year in Europe, the odd one in
> random places, and the lion's share in the US. Those statistics are
> essentially meaningless now.
Why are they meaningless? The IETF should overwhelmingly meet where
the participants are, wherever that might be. I still like your
algorithm.
May be the IETF should also look for other working methods which
would permit to involve more people more pertinently while needing
less meetings. The ITEF matter is technical, the target is to produce
document which will be _read_ by engineers from all over the world.
Why would this necessarily call for people to meet? May be the main
problem of the IETF documents is that they are from a culture of
people having f2f meetings to tune their positions, while their
users/readers do not. I think it is a common problem to many
organizations. But that of all the technical organizations/SSDO the
IETF is probably the best suited to address that problem, because it
has the competence, experience, and a significant part of
participants being on their own expense account.
jfc
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf