Dave,
[off-topic] inline
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Dave Crocker <dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net>
wrote:
On 12/11/2015 6:19 AM, Nadeau Thomas wrote:
I agree. Groups should actually be free to use whatever tools make sense
for the task at hand.... It
shouldn’t matter as long as the collaboration is as effective as possible
for the participants.
As a philosophical point, that first sentence sounds great. As a
practical one, the latter sentence makes the philosophic
insufficiently-specified...
To be inclusive, the operation of the group must rely on use of tools
that are known to be widely and easily usable, in the IETF context, by
essentially anyone wishing to participate. That permits quite a bit of
variation, but not infinite variation. Limiting the choices to tools
that have an established track record in the IETF removes risk from the
meeting activity.
Obviously there need to be ways to add new tools, but let's separate
those and class them as 'experiments'.
In fact a missing bit of IETF procedural documentation is a listing of
tools that have been found to be both usable and useful, and in what
ways they've been useful.
Agreed - I've been trying to encourage having a wiki page on the
different tools. I think it'd be excellent to see more of that.
Regards,
Alia
Hmmm...
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net