![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Mary Barnes wrote:
Dave, There are a few topics for which mailing list discussion has failed to reach consensus and would really benefit from f2f time. You can look at SIP WG archives for example for a couple of the hot topics. As chairs, we do try to push for completion of work on the mailing lists, but this isn't always successful ...
...
The other issue is just the sheer volume of work incoming to RAI -it's over 20% of overall IETF drafts per Jari's stats:
Mary,Thanks for the quick response. From my perspective, your opening words, above, do suggest exactly the right underlying process and the right role for f2f meeting time.
From what you posted before, however, it sounds as if there is a chronic lack of meeting time. This means either that "too many" items can't be solved on the list -- that is, that there is something about mailing list exchanges that isn't working well enough. Another possibility is what's suggested by your later text: there are too many things being attempted. In other words, perhaps RAI is trying to do too much too quickly? (I mean that as an honest question; I don't really have an opinion of my own. ) RAI is certainly a broad area, but it's hard to miss that even RAI folk take note of the massive workload. Hence sipping, as a filter on proposals. An industry can only absorb just so much out of standards arena. Is it really absorbing (implementing, deploying, using) RAI output fast enough to justify the current workload?
Also, note that 6 of the RAI WGs make up 50% of the top 12 WGs based on volume of documents: http://www.arkko.com/tools/stats/wgdistr.html
It's pretty easy to have lots of documents get generated. What is difficult is building real energy (support and effort) to pursue them, adopt them, and use them. Hence my question about industry uptake.
d/ _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.