On 2/20/08, John C Klensin <john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com> wrote:
How much more of this will it take before you conclude that we
have a problem?
John,
Forgive me for saying so, but this sounds like a very extreme
response to me. (Unless the expected answer is "A lot")
During a transition like this, there are hundreds of things to
manage. Several of the I-D submission problems were due to the code
supplied by NSS being less portable than most applications; one
problem that I'm aware of was due to a bug in idnits, which would have
been triggered by either the old installation or the new one.
When writing a tool to accept meeting registrations, let's say you
are a random web app developer and you want to give the user an
opportunity to pick their country from a drop-down list. What set of
choices are you going to give them?
Over the last several years, I've been fairly closely involved in
the IETF's IT infrastructure; I've been quite impressed with how well
the transition is going. Problems are being acknowledged and fixed
quickly. The AMS staff is very knowledgeable, but the system they
were given was basically undocumented and requires a fair amount of
TLC to keep running day-to-day. One input to setting expectations for
how this transition turns out should be the quality of the input.
At this point, instead of worrying about the fact that there have
been hiccoughs during the transition, I'd congratulate AMS for a job
well done. The web site, in my experience, is significantly more
responsive when browsing the mailing list archives. While there have
been hiccoughs in the tools, they worked (and continue to work) to
resolve them.
Bill
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf