Re: Uneccesary slowness.

[Margaret Wasserman <margaret at thingmagic.com>]

At 5:05 PM -0700 5/18/05, David Kessens wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 01:08:39PM -0700, Dave Crocker wrote:
> >  For example, as you note, the IESG approves working groups and working group
> >  charters.  So the IESG does, in fact, have the ability to control the later
> >  demand placed on it.
>
> Are you suggesting that we start disapproving new working groups
> since they cause work for the IESG ?

Yes!  In fact, if I closed down all of those pesky INT area WGs, I 
would definitely be able to process those individual submissions on 
time!  :-)

Seriously, I am operating under the assumption that timely review and 
processing of WG charters and WG documents is more important to the 
community than timely processing of RFC Editor individual 
submissions, and the fact that I do not always manage to process 
individual submissions on time reflects that prioritization.

Are there really a significant number of people who think it should 
be otherwise?

Margaret


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf