< draft-elkins-mtgvenue-participation-metrics-00.txt		draft-elkins-mtgvenue-participation-metrics-01.txt >
	INTERNET-DRAFT N. Elkins		INTERNET-DRAFT N. Elkins
	Inside Products		Inside Products
	V. Hegde		V. Hegde
	Intended Status: Best Current Practice Consultant		Intended Status: Best Current Practice Consultant
	Expires: January 2017 July 18, 2016		Expires: May 3, 2017 October 30, 2016
	Definition of Participation Metrics for IETF Attendees		Definition of Participation Metrics for IETF Attendees
	draft-elkins-mtgvenue-participation-metrics-00		draft-elkins-mtgvenue-participation-metrics-01
	Abstract		Abstract
	IETF meetings are held physically in various geographic regions of		IETF meetings are held physically in various geographic regions of
	the world. One of the criteria for choosing a location is the		the world. One of the criteria for choosing a location is the amount
	amount of participation by the people in that region. Additionally,		of participation by the people in that region. Additionally,
	questions arise as to whether holding a physical meeting in a		questions arise as to whether holding a physical meeting in a
	location increases the amount of participation by local attendees.		location increases the amount of participation by local attendees.
	Participation in the IETF process may occur in a number of different		Participation in the IETF process may occur in a number of different
	ways: email lists, writing drafts, physical or remote attendance at a		ways: email lists, writing drafts, physical or remote attendance at a
	meeting, chairing Working Groups and so on. This document defines		meeting, chairing Working Groups and so on. This document defines the
	the metrics and terms which may be used to measure participation both		metrics and terms which may be used to measure participation both
	before and after an IETF meeting.		before and after an IETF meeting.
	Status of this Memo		Status of this Memo
	This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the		This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
	provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.		provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that		Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
	other groups may also distribute working documents as		other groups may also distribute working documents as
	skipping to change at page 2, line 33 ¶		skipping to change at page 2, line 33 ¶
	2 Participation and its Nature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		2 Participation and its Nature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	2.1 What does Participation Mean? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		2.1 What does Participation Mean? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	2.2 Ways to Participate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		2.2 Ways to Participate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	2.2.1 Email Lists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		2.2.1 Email Lists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
	2.2.2 Authoring Drafts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		2.2.2 Authoring Drafts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
	2.2.3 Authoring Seminal Drafts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		2.2.3 Authoring Seminal Drafts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
	2.2.4 Starting a new Working Group or BOF . . . . . . . . . . 6		2.2.4 Starting a new Working Group or BOF . . . . . . . . . . 6
	2.2.5 Remote Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		2.2.5 Remote Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	2.2.6 Attending Physical Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		2.2.6 Attending Physical Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	2.2.7 Participating as a Leader . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		2.2.7 Participating as a Leader . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
			2.2.8 Participation in standards implementation. . . . . . . . 6
			2.2.9 Participation in tools development . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	3 Measuring Contributions following a Physical IETF Meeting . . . 6		3 Measuring Contributions following a Physical IETF Meeting . . . 6
	4 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		4 Guidelines for tracking metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	5 IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		4.1 Phase 1 - Non-binding metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	6 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		4.2 Phase 2 - How to measure them . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	6.1 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		4.3 Phase 3 - Accept as input for meetings . . . . . . . . . . 7
	7 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		5 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		6 IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
			7 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
			7.1 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
			8 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
			Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	1 Introduction		1 Introduction
	IETF meetings are held physically in various geographic regions of		IETF meetings are held physically in various geographic regions of
	the world. One of the criteria for choosing a location is the		the world. One of the criteria for choosing a location is the amount
	amount of participation by the people in that region. Additionally,		of participation by the people in that region. Additionally,
	questions arise as to whether holding a physical meeting in a		questions arise as to whether holding a physical meeting in a
	location increases the amount of participation by local attendees.		location increases the amount of participation by local attendees.
	Participation in the IETF process may occur in a number of different		Participation in the IETF process may occur in a number of different
	ways: email lists, writing drafts, physical or remote attendance at a		ways: email lists, writing drafts, physical or remote attendance at a
	meeting, chairing Working Groups and so on. This document defines		meeting, chairing Working Groups and so on. This document defines the
	the metrics and terms which may be used to measure participation both		metrics and terms which may be used to measure participation both
	before and after an IETF meeting.		before and after an IETF meeting.
	1.1 Geographic outreach		1.1 Geographic outreach
	The document [I-D.sullivan-mtgvenue-decisions] "Prioritized		The document [I-D.sullivan-mtgvenue-decisions] "Prioritized
	Objectives for Making Decisions in Selecting a Meeting Venue"		Objectives for Making Decisions in Selecting a Meeting Venue"
	contains the following:		contains the following:
	"The IETF moves its meetings around to ensure that those who can		"The IETF moves its meetings around to ensure that those who can
	participate in person at the meetings share the difficulty and cost		participate in person at the meetings share the difficulty and cost
	skipping to change at page 5, line 34 ¶		skipping to change at page 5, line 34 ¶
	However, there may be cultural barriers. Sometimes people		However, there may be cultural barriers. Sometimes people
	(especially when new) are not comfortable with the process of posting		(especially when new) are not comfortable with the process of posting
	to the Working Group email list or want to check with others about		to the Working Group email list or want to check with others about
	their understanding of an Internet Draft before asking a question or		their understanding of an Internet Draft before asking a question or
	posting a suggestion. So, the IETF Mentoring program is starting		posting a suggestion. So, the IETF Mentoring program is starting
	Internet Draft Review Teams so that would-be participants can work		Internet Draft Review Teams so that would-be participants can work
	with remote mentors to facilitate engagement. The desired output of		with remote mentors to facilitate engagement. The desired output of
	such teams is posting to an email list.		such teams is posting to an email list.
	Posting to a fundamental Working Group email list should be the only		Posting to a fundamental Working Group email list should be the only
	metric counted. Posting to an email list such as IETF discuss,		metric counted. Posting to an email list such as IETF discuss,
	96attendees and so on, is not a worthy metric to gauge participation.		96attendees and so on, is not a worthy metric to gauge participation.
	2.2.2 Authoring Drafts		2.2.2 Authoring Drafts
	Not all Internet Drafts become RFCs. Often, the statistic used is		Not all Internet Drafts become RFCs. Often, the statistic used is
	that one in ten Internet Drafts become an RFC. Still, authoring a		that one in ten Internet Drafts become an RFC. Still, authoring a
	draft shows active participation. The draft should however, spark		draft shows active participation. The draft should however, spark
	active discussion on the email list. If it is chosen for live		active discussion on the email list. If it is chosen for live
	presentation at a Working Group session, then that is a high degree		presentation at a Working Group session, then that is a high degree
	of participation.		of participation.
	skipping to change at page 6, line 40 ¶		skipping to change at page 6, line 40 ¶
	Serving in an IETF management position, Working Group chair, Area		Serving in an IETF management position, Working Group chair, Area
	Director, and so on can easily be measured and should be regarded as		Director, and so on can easily be measured and should be regarded as
	a high degree of participation. Fundamental leadership positions		a high degree of participation. Fundamental leadership positions
	(those of standards developing groups) should be weighted more		(those of standards developing groups) should be weighted more
	heavily than process group leadership positions. Having said that,		heavily than process group leadership positions. Having said that,
	it takes time and a network of contacts to become a fundamental group		it takes time and a network of contacts to become a fundamental group
	leader. It also likely takes consistent physical attendance at IETF		leader. It also likely takes consistent physical attendance at IETF
	meetings.		meetings.
			2.2.8 Participation in standards implementation
			Standards are not useful in isolation. Implementations of standards
			are important to see what happens "when the rubber meets the road".
			Many times, once an idea in a draft is implemented in the real world
			there are problems found either in interoperability, security or some
			other areas. The IETF has recognized this with more emphasis on code
			through hackathons and interaction with open source implementers.
			Implementing an open source solution should also be considered as a
			contribution. Often implementation of standards goes hand-in-hand
			with the standard implementation.
			2.2.9 Participation in tools development
			Several tools which the IETF uses (such as datatracker) are either
			completely or partially maintained by volunteers. Contribution to
			these tools also helps makes interaction and tracking of activities
			easier for other IETF volunteers. Additions to tools should also be
			considered as contributions. These can possibly be measured in terms
			on number of commits or lines of code (though admittedly these are
			crude metrics).
	3 Measuring Contributions following a Physical IETF Meeting		3 Measuring Contributions following a Physical IETF Meeting
	Metrics should be kept and published for the above categories		Metrics should be kept and published for the above categories
	following each physical IETF meeting. Metrics may be kept by		following each physical IETF meeting. Metrics may be kept by
	individual and also by geographic region. The geographic region		individual and also by geographic region. The geographic region
	should be country, continent and Internet Registry (APNIC, Afrinic,		should be country, continent and Internet Registry (APNIC, Afrinic,
	etc.) This way, one can readily assess the impact of a meeting in a		etc.) This way, one can readily assess the impact of a meeting in a
	particular area as well as the growth in contribution for a region.		particular area as well as the growth in contribution for a region.
	Aspiring regions who wish to increase their IETF presence will also		Aspiring regions who wish to increase their IETF presence will also
	have a way to show their increase in participation over time.		have a way to show their increase in participation over time.
	4 Security Considerations		4 Guidelines for tracking metrics
			4.1 Phase 1 - Non-binding metrics
			Define a broad set of non-binding metrics. Some of the metrics can be
			easily tracked such a number of drafts and meetings attended. Other
			are little fuzzy such as email contributions, comments in WG on the
			microphone. Make a list of these and start implementing them.
			4.2 Phase 2 - How to measure them
			Metrics such as email contributions can be tracked partially by
			looking up email addresses of participants (and mapping them to
			country against known databases such as registration history and
			drafts/RFCs). Track and refine these metrics and get consensus on
			which ones to track and on the implementations as well. These can be
			separate drafts.
			4.3 Phase 3 - Accept an input for meetings
			Once these metrics are acceptably robust, they can be checked for
			suitability for continued tracking. These can be used as inputs in
			decision making process for meeting locations.
			5 Security Considerations
	There are no security considerations.		There are no security considerations.
	5 IANA Considerations		6 IANA Considerations
	There are no IANA considerations.		There are no IANA considerations.
	6 References		7 References
	6.1 Informative References		8.1 Informative References
	[I-D.baker-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process] Baker, F., "IAOC		[I-D.baker-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process] Baker, F., "IAOC
	Plenary Meeting Venue Selection Process", draft-baker-mtgvenue-iaoc-		Plenary Meeting Venue Selection Process", draft-baker-mtgvenue-iaoc-
	venue-selection-process-03 (work in progress), July 2016.		venue-selection-process-03 (work in progress), July 2016.
	[I-D.sullivan-mtgvenue-decisions] Sullivan, A., "Prioritized		[I-D.sullivan-mtgvenue-decisions] Sullivan, A., "Prioritized
	Objectives for Making Decisions in Selecting a Meeting Venue", draft-		Objectives for Making Decisions in Selecting a Meeting Venue", draft-
	sullivan-mtgvenue-decisions-00(work in progress), July 2016.		sullivan-mtgvenue-decisions-00(work in progress), July 2016.
	7 Acknowledgments		9 Acknowledgments
	The authors would like to thank Fred Baker, Yoav Nir, S. Moonesamy		The authors would like to thank Fred Baker, Yoav Nir, S. Moonesamy
	and Dave Crocker for their comments.		and Dave Crocker for their comments.
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Nalini Elkins		Nalini Elkins
	Inside Products, Inc.		Inside Products, Inc.
	36A Upper Circle		36A Upper Circle
	Carmel Valley, CA 93924		Carmel Valley, CA 93924
	United States		United States
	Phone: +1 831 659 8360		Phone: +1 831 659 8360
	Email: nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com		Email: nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com
	http://www.insidethestack.com		http://www.insidethestack.com
	Vinayak Hegde		Vinayak Hegde
	Consultant		Consultant
	Brahma Sun City, Wadgaon-Sheri		F2, First Floor, Prabhu Kunj, 7th Cross,
	Pune, Maharashtra 411014		Eshwara Layout, Indiranagar 2nd Stage,
	INDIA		Bangalore - 560038
	Phone: +91 9449834401		Phone: +91 9449834401
	Email: vinayakh@gmail.com		Email: vinayakh@gmail.com
	URI: http://www.vinayakhegde.com		URI: http://www.vinayakhegde.com
End of changes. 16 change blocks.
	26 lines changed or deleted		76 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/