Fred Baker wrote:
So, you are asserting that the primary working groups that I interact
with, of which v6ops is typical, are all outliers.
Possibly. But, yes, possibly not. My point is that this discussion
hasn't considered the question. (Based on RFC 5218, each of us ought to
be aggresively careful about our beliefs in what is typical for the IETF...)
I suspect that the story of several blind wise men describing an
elephant is relevant here.
Exactly right. Which is why discussions like these should spend serious
energy worrying about what is typical.
Yup
To be honest, I think the body that has the best collective view is the
IESG and/or the IAB. Reason: as a group, they monitor all working groups
and they collectively compare notes.
From a theoretical standpoint, I agree. From a practical one, I don't.
There is too much history of seeing the larger IETF community assert
that IETF management is out of touch with this kind of reality.
At the least, IETF management comprises people with no particular
background in making these sorts of assessments. (Of course, some are
excellent at it, so again the question is about 'typical'.)
For something like this, there needs to be a combination of assessment
from management and assessment from participants.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf