At 23:51 -0500 5/6/10, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
Dear IESG,
I'm conflicted on this one.
That's a statement I can agree with. Superficially, it seems to make
sense that 20% (1 day of 5) doesn't count. But...
As others have said - paying full fare and attending one day vs.
buying a day pass only means more money being spent. In 1998 I've
even done a 1-day attendance having paid the full fare because of
scheduling conflicts. Came, made two presentations, attended
probably the first DNSSEC deployment meeting (at lunch), and left.
Had to fly (US) coast-to-coast too.
What does it mean to understand the culture of the IETF? And does
that have to come with physical presence at a meeting? You can get a
lot of it via the mail lists. If you know where 3 of 5 IETFs are
located, you pretty much have to be tuned in.
Nomcom requires a lot of time and effort, especially in the way the
IETF runs the process. It's pretty far-fetched to imagine someone
who "can't spell IESG"
- volunteer for nomcom
- get selected via the random process
- and then have much of a detrimental impact (which is what we are afraid of)
- for the duration of the nomcom process
In the end, I think that the new policy is a case of "over specification."
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis
NeuStar You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468
Discussing IPv4 address policy is like deciding what to eat on the Titanic.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf