Re: bettering open source involvement

On 29/07/16 16:20, MH Michael Hammer (5304) wrote:
> I'm not asserting that IETF needs to bring cycle times down to days,
> weeks or months 
I think months would actually be a good goal, for some
bits of work, and is doable in some cases. At present that
does require quite a special kind of work and for involved
folks to be very familiar with IETF stuff.

> but my sense is that there is a brokenness to the
> process. 
Well, not quite "the process" but more I think "how we operate
the process" - a lot of delays are not due to the formal process
but down to disagreements between smart people who are quite good
at disagreeing subtly and also a lack of time to do this kind of
work.

> Slowness to generate the standards, slowness in adoption of
> standards, etc.  There are no magic fixes but there surely are ways
> of reducing drag.
I agree. And I think we should try get better at that despite
pretty much every single process-change suggestion attracting
some opposition from somewhere. (Maybe we should have a competition
to see if anyone can come up with a universally supported process
change for the IETF:-)

S.

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature