ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Some Comments for Tutorial slides presented in IETF 89

2014-03-04 23:52:01
Dear Scott Bradner,

Thanks for your training, and I enjoyed it even though I listen to it
before two years remotely in other previous meetings. You were very
inspiring us and encouraging us to participate, thanks. I asked you in the
end some questions and I got the answers but I thought it will be nice if I
give my comments and review on this list to possibly help the future
attendees.

Review date: 05.03.2014.
Document Presentation date: 02.03.2014.
Document: Bradner, 2014, IETF Structure and Internet Standards Process,
IETF 89, London.
Reviewed by Abdussalam.

Summary: The presentation is a tutorial base and it may be said it is a new
comer orientation, however, the reviewer believes that it is training to
help new participant to engage and join. The review is based on that the
document is for training new participants in IETF activities. The number of
slide (S) or pages of the document is 60 slides/pages, it maybe long for 2
hour tutorial, however, it is considering many important issues of IETF and
also considers active participants understandings. There are few
difficulties for new comer to understand, but below comment points try to
improve.

The title: IETF structure and Internet Standards Process.

AB1- I recommend the title to be amended to: What is IETF,
objectives, structure, processes and policies.  For simplicity and to guide
audience to important main points.

AB2- the tutorial did not mention the IETF vision, but yes it mentioned the
purposes. The vision is very important to any new customer or new
participant. Many old participant in IETF may still forget the main vision
of IETF.

AB3- Slide 6, IETF purpose. I suggest to add the words (Internet
Community). So one of most important activity is that IETF serves that
community.

AB4- Slides 4, 10 and 37, are confusing. In S4 it says IETF has no members,
but in S10 it says IESG members and other body members, also in S37 shows
that IESG is part of IETF. That may mean that IETF has members, so we
cannot say as in S4 that IETF has no members.

AB5- the slides consider how the IETF WG is created but not how IETF areas
are created. I don't think it is right that IESG should only be responsible
for creating IETF areas. The community should have voice in creating or
changing IETF areas.

I hope in future that each 5 years we get a message from IESG saying
IETF areas structure proposal (renew same, or restructure). That can be
done in one meeting may be better than the list.

AB5- Slide 5, shows f2f (i.e. face to face) attendance of participants
which increased between 1996 to 2002, in average above 2000. That is a 8
year duration with many meetings per year (totally about 24 f2f event) with
numbers of about 2000 attendees and then decreased after 2002 becoming in
average above 1000 and less than 1500 attendees. IMHO, the community had
not continued to attend because of possible difficulties or high
probability of waste time, with slow production, also the diversity problem
that still IETF needs to fix.

AB6- recommend that slides 35 and 36 to be in the start slides. The role
and scope of IETF is the first important issue to think of by new comers
and how to compare IETF to ITU. So think it is better flow of tutorial to
make both 35 and 36 beside slide 6 (i.e.  IETF purpose).

AB7- in the tutorial on Sunday there was not enough time in the
end organised for new comers to ask questions only about 10 minutes.
Usually in tutorials the aim and objectives are two way communication, and
more Q&A interaction. I hope that IETF future meeting tutorials consider
timing of tutorial to achieve better objectives and more new
comer understanding.

Overall, it was a great tutorial and I think all enjoyed it, but this
message is just to add above feedback for future better understanding. I
may be wrong in some points, but could not keep it for myself, just wanted
to share my thoughts, and like to see others comment.

Best Regards
Abdussalam Baryun