Re: Call for Comment: RFC 4693 experiment

[Dan York <dyork at voxeo.com>]

I have to agree with Fred here:

On Jan 17, 2008, at 2:21 PM, Fred Baker wrote:

I would argue that (1) has not been shown. Several IONs have been produced, but I don't see people referring to them. It looks like it is being treated as a lightweight way to publish something a lot like an RFC, and I'm not sure why the proper response to our present situation shouldn't be to figure out what we once had - a lightweight way to publish an RFC.

I've been on various IETF mailing lists for a year or two now and I've never seen any reference to these ION documents. Obviously there must have been and I must have missed it... but I've not had other people point me to them, either.  For instance, at IETF 70, I agreed to take minutes for one of the sessions and when I asked if there was any preferred format, no one pointed me to this ION: http://www.ietf.org/IESG/content/ions/ion-agenda-and-minutes.html 

Have now learned of them by this email exchange, some of the documents look both interesting and useful, but I'd agree with Fred that in order to call the series "successful" there really need to be more people pointing to them and using them.

My 2 cents,

Dan

-- 

Dan York, CISSP, Director of Emerging Communication Technology

Office of the CTO    Voxeo Corporation     dyork at voxeo.com

Phone: +1-407-455-5859  Skype: danyork  http://www.voxeo.com

Blogs: http://blogs.voxeo.com  http://www.disruptivetelephony.com

Bring your web applications to the phone.

Find out how at http://evolution.voxeo.com

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