Stef and all,
Very good points here stef, and well said. >;)
Einar Stefferud wrote:
> The meaning to be taken from this exchange is that the lists, as in
> the IETF, should be where the actual work is finalized, following
> reasonable periods of "last call", such as 3 weeks on final drafts.
>
> It is fine for side conversations to occur, but the final draft
> approval should be done with rapidly updated drafts in the open on a
> public list.
>
> It was back in 1992, I believe, when the IETF switched over from
> making the final decisions in F2F meetings, and shifted to final
> decisions requiring consensus on the WG mailing lists.
>
> This happened because in the case of SMTPEXT, some decisions had been
> made on the list, and at the St Louis IETF, an F2F meeting reversed
> everything, with a different set of participants. All hell broke
> loose, and it was decided for that WG that all decisions hence forth
> would be made by the list participants, which includes all WG
> participants, instead of just those who can and do travel.
>
> This then spread gradually to all IETF WGs, until now, many people
> think the IETF has always worked that way;-)...
>
> As we got into the IFWP process, this was again reversed (for IFWP),
> perhaps because so many new players came on board, who do not and did
> not know how to work via the net. They still don't, by and large.
>
> This shift started actually, with the IAHC, and I believe that to some
> extent, many of our new participants are not yet on board for net
> based discussion and decision making. We still have large numbers of
> DNS and ICANN participants who are not comfortable on the net,
> including most of the ICANN Board of Directors, for example.
>
> And of course, this includes most of the INTA and WIPO people, so they
> are off doing their normal F2F thing, and thinking that this is the
> normal way of doing business. And of course, taking advantage of the
> way travel requirements will reduce the number of participants and
> help to maintain organizer's control of events.
>
> This shift leaves most of us Internauts finding ourselves excluded,
> and only allowed to review and complain about done deals that come out
> of meetings we do not attend.
>
> Onward... Lets find a way to start using the net to better advantage.
>
> You will note how fast ORSC was able to pull a new draft together,
> once it was decided to do so, and you will notice that it was done in
> full view of the public, with a few last minute recycles to include
> some last minute suggestions.
>
> So, we have just shown, once again, that we can deal with this stuff
> on the net, if we want to.
>
> Cheers...\Stef
>
> >From your message Wed, 6 Jan 1999 22:21:12 +0100 :
> }
> }Christopher,
> }
> }You wrote:
> }
> }> I wouldn't presume, however, that you're suggesting that someone who
> }> cannot make the meetings, for any reason, should be left out of the
> }> process
> }>
> }Not at all.
> }But I guess it will be obvious that, willing or not, participation to
> }meetings will put you in a "privileged" situation.
> }We may argue how much we want about it, but we are still unable to get away
> }completely with F2F meeting, and as long there will be an added value in
> }meetings, there will be an added value in attending.
> }Pretty much what happened for the IFWP process, but with less noise ;>)
> }
> }> - although I still have never been added to the participants
> }> list of DNSO.ORG.
> }>
> }I can't even tell you if something at all is happening on that list, since I
> }unsubscribed long time ago.
> }
> }Regards to you and baby
> }Roberto
> }
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________
