I'm not an IETF WG Chair, but I have attended IETF meetings for some time and
have many years of experience chairing in other organizations.
A significant part of the job of a chair is facilitating sound progress of
chartered work. Issues that haven't been resolved on the list may be complex
ones that take more than 10 minutes to understand and get to the heart of
differing viewpoints. It is often more efficient to devote more meeting time
to getting such issues sorted rather than to distribute meeting time evenly
across drafts.
Also, when a group has multiple drafts/projects to progress, it is often more
efficient for the group to concentrate on drafts that are foundational (i.e.
that need to be settled so that other work items can progress) or that are
close to done in order to finish those and be able to concentrate future
efforts on the remaining items.
An even arbitrary distribution of time doesn't serve those purposes.
Pat
From: ietf [mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Abdussalam
Baryun
Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2014 7:43 PM
To: ietf
Subject: Policy of WG chairs in organising time for presentations and face2face
discussions
Dear IETF WGs' Chairs,
I suggest in London that you assign only maximum 10 minutes present per WG
draft and maximum 5 minute for individual draft (as limit policy). We need to
use more input and have more face2face (F2F) discussion in our meeting. I
remember we discussed this before but it will be nice if we know what chairs
are thinking before few days of the meeting.
Meeting time is money and that we need to improve the use of IETF times within
F2F WG discussions and decisions. If an author cannot describe issues of draft
in 10 minutes then it will be difficult for the WG listeners to discuss and
make decisions within another 10 minutes per item. Please comment.
Best wishes,
Abdussalam
WG Meetings are needed for group interactions and group decisions not
individual presentations or individual decisions.