Melinda is right about the gatekeeping role of the IETF. I have personally
experienced that several times. Negotiating that gatekeeping may well be the
hardest part of getting a work started. And it mostly has to do with one's
capacity to "convince" the relevant AD of the value of the work.
This is probably why the diversity of viewpoints in the steering group is most
useful.
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Melinda Shore
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 7:33 PM
To: Stephen Farrell
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Less Corporate Diversity
On 3/22/13 6:28 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
FWIW, seems to me you're describing one leg of the elephant each. From
my experience I'd say you both actually have an appreciation of the
overall elephant but that's not coming out in this kind of thread.
Well, maybe, but it seems to me that he's lost track of the discussion. My
argument is that the IESG has a gatekeeping function in taking on new work,
that's based (aside from
resourcing) on a set of values, their view of what's needed in the industry,
etc. With a uniform IESG membership you're not going to get a rather uniform
view of the overall context for IETF work, you'll lose perspective, and
consequently there's value to having members who aren't almost all from big
manufacturers.
I'm not sure what Martin's point is, to be honest.
Melinda