Hi Martin,
At 22:42 26-10-2011, Martin Sustrik wrote:
That can be either bad thing (too few experts, no good estimate
about participation in the potential working group) or a good thing
(random selection of IETF participants tests the sanity of the proposal).
The second point is quite interesting. It may also be applicable for
individual submissions. That random selection brings in participants
from outside the area if it is an in-person meeting.
For example: We have a discussion group of ~50 people that we would
like to change to IETF WG, however, it's not likely more than 2-3
people would be able to get to the BoF in person.
There isn't any requirement for a BoF to form a WG. BTW, there is a
difference between "discussion group of ~50 people" and "~50
subscribers". The former means broader participation and might
provide a better view of commitment in comparison to room filled with
people who only have to be around for an hour.
There was a comment in this thread about "without offending
anyone". As an example, someone on another mailing list used the
word "rubbish" in a reply [1]. In a face to face meeting, someone
used the following words: "one of the worst pieces of [removed] I
ever read in my life" [2]. Would the discussion group interacting
only remotely be able to handle the social hurdles?
Regards,
-sm
1. I didn't read the exchange as negative.
2. The follow-up was positive.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf