[Sip] RAI Scheduling

[Cullen Jennings <fluffy at cisco.com>]

The problem here is, well, time. At other times we may have had  
constraints of not enough WGs, or not enough cycles from chairs, or  
not enough chairs, but the issues we are having right here is hours in  
the IETF agenda.

Right now we have some conflicts in the scheduling with WG and we only  
have two BOFs. Most of the RAI WG has less time than they want but SIP  
is the most squeezed IMHO. If I had another hour of agenda time in RAI  
right now, SIP is the WG that I would try to give it to and i suspect  
Jon would be on the same page.

The SIP chairs did request more time and did predict that there would  
be a lot of stuff we were trying to squeeze into this. I've asked  
around to chairs of some other RAI WGs and asked if they really think  
they will use up all their time but most are already feeling like it  
is a tight schedule. As we see the agendas for other WG's get  
finalized it might become apparent that we could move some time around  
but I view this as a fairly unlikely possibility.

One observation would be if we could finish (or shoot) some WGs we  
would have more time. Similarly if we could finish a bunch of WG  
items, we would have more time for things. I have lost count of how  
many times the WG has taken a HUM on how the keep-alive timers in  
outbound will work. (I don't mind embarrassing the authors of outbound  
so it is more or less my case study on how not to do a draft but there  
are plenty of similar cases around). Any time people HUM yes to adopt  
a new WG milestone, they need to realize they are putting that work at  
a higher priority level than all the stuff that is not a WG milestone.  
Similarly when we form new WGs it reduces the time available for  
existing WGs. Keep in mind we are running a 2 hours RUCUS BOF which is  
largely related to SIP security so we already do have another 2 hours  
on SIP security.

So what can we do? Two years ago we had an RAI meeting to talk about  
this subject and others. Some of the ideas that came out of that have  
been implemented - splitting the BLISS work out to separate WG and the  
formation of the RAI WG to helps chairs both came out this.  Jon and I  
had talked about having another meeting on this topic at IETF 71 but  
when we saw the agenda we decided it was too full to fit this in. I  
would not be surprised if we tried to run this at the Dublin IETF.   
One thing we can do is encourage stuff to get finished instead of just  
being endlessly discussed. If something has been discussed at a  
meeting, and nothing that would change the discussion has changed  
since the previous discussion, it is surprising to me that we keep  
discussing it anyways.

I spend a ton of time trying to get a workable schedule out on time  
for RAI. (And many thanks to all the RAI Chairs - they do a good job  
of jumping all the hoops to make this happen). I would love feedback  
on what we need to be spending less time on. I get plenty of feedback  
on what needs more.


Cullen <with my AD hat on>


_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors at cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping at ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip