Re: draft status links on the wg pages?

[Dave Crocker <dhc2 at dcrocker.net>]

Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> > I happened to choose the particular example of Discuss simply because 
> > it is of immediate concern to me, but my point was intended, of 
> > course, to be more general.
> >
> > That's why your raising the 'cost' issue for the current discussion 
> > came as such a confusing surprise.
>
> Sorry to confuse: let me be clear that migrating selected tools from
> the volunteer community to the secretariat is one of the IAD's objectives,
> and you're perfectly correct that a cost/benefit analysis is the right
> way to make the selection.

ack.

However, let me again raise the question of whether the migration should be in 
that direction.

I have no idea whether the Tools folks have any interest in on-going maintenance 
of more of the IETF web pages, but I think it is reasonable to ask, particularly 
for content pertaining to the technical work of the IETF.

Since we rely on volunteers for a number of IETF activities, beyond writing 
specs, it is at least worth exploring this additional avenue of saving money 
(and maybe even getting better operations, although I note this not as a 
criticism of the Secretariat, past or present, but of the normal effects of 
being overworked.)

d/
--

  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net

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