ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: The Purpose of WG participants Review (was Re: Purpose of IESG Review)

2013-04-19 04:09:06
Only that you know enough people so that you could push a new technology even 
without attending, although you would need to collaborate with some people who 
do go. But pushing a new technology requires team building anyway.

The same should apply to other non-attenders who have gained some reputation.


On Apr 19, 2013, at 11:23 AM, l(_dot_)wood(_at_)surrey(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk wrote:


and the point of your ad-hominem argument is what, exactly?

Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood/publications/internet-drafts


________________________________________
From: Yoav Nir [ynir(_at_)checkpoint(_dot_)com]
Sent: 18 April 2013 15:18
To: Wood L  Dr (Electronic Eng)
Cc: worley(_at_)ariadne(_dot_)com; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: The Purpose of WG participants Review (was Re: Purpose of IESG   
  Review)

Looking in Jari's statistics site, you have three RFCs. One of those has 
several co-authors that I recognize as current "goers". You also have a 
current draft with several co-authors, but I have no idea whether they're 
"goers" or not. Anyway, you are not a hermit. Through the RFCs and drafts 
that you have co-authored, you know people who do attend.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>