Re: [Autoconf] On WG progress and draft-ietf-autoconf-adhoc-addr-model
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Autoconf] On WG progress and draft-ietf-autoconf-adhoc-addr-model



Hello Alex,

Alexandru Petrescu wrote:

If we realize that was wrong, then we need a procedure to deal with
 that.  Ideas feel free to  express how to deal with it.

My suggestion would be to ask your contacts on the IESG about which
working group would be appropriate for this work.

Hmmm... let me think... who do I know in IESG...

They have colorful dots and love to spend time on process
details :-)


Otherwise, let's see what we can do process-wise here in AUTOCONF.

Indeed.  I'd suggest promulgating the draft after verifying
consensus.


How about asking the Chairs to ask the Group to send their requests for
agenda items soon?

I thought that was already done, at your instigation.


This is also a sort of process, or ways I see happening already in
many WGs, and not in AUTOCONF :-(

Yes, I see many working groups making progress.


If we do that agenda stuff now, then there'll be less surprise later during the meeting.

Or you prefer to be surprised?

I'm already surprised, but of course setting the agenda
soon would be a good idea.  And in other emails I see
that some agenda topics were identified.


[...]

I have never seen any other time where people submit WG items
before having consensus on the WG.

You might want to check on that.

Well I checked recently 6MAN, NETEXT, MEXT, ROLL, 6LoWPAN - the 5 had calls for WG item adoption. Often there was call for adoption of the DT output too.

I think Jari Arkko had email relevant to this topic.



I am not nitpickying sorry. I have already discussed twice offline with somebody else surprised how we don't see agenda, no item adoption call, on this WG.

Let alone the non-use of the issue tracker.

This is a good point.  The issue tracker is terribly underutilized
in most working groups, as I found out to my surprise when I
was trying to learn to use it.


Regards,
Charlie P.


Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.