I happened to choose the particular example of Discuss simply because it
is of immediate concern to me, but my point was intended, of course, to
be more general.
That's why your raising the 'cost' issue for the current discussion came
as such a confusing surprise.
Sorry to confuse: let me
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
I happened to choose the particular example of Discuss simply because
it is of immediate concern to me, but my point was intended, of
course, to be more general.
That's why your raising the 'cost' issue for the current discussion
came as such a confusing surprise.
On Wednesday, December 20, 2006 07:19:10 AM -0800 Dave Crocker
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since we rely on volunteers for a number of IETF activities, beyond
writing specs, it is at least worth exploring this additional avenue of
saving money (and maybe even getting better operations,
Dave Crocker wrote:
...
So my suggestions are:
1. Move these Status pages out of the tools development area and make
them an official part of a working group's official pages.
That isn't simply a matter of wishing it to be so. It actually
involves work (to make the tools that generate these
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
1. Move these Status pages out of the tools development area and make
them an official part of a working group's official pages.
That isn't simply a matter of wishing it to be so. It actually involves work
(to make the tools that generate these pages ready to hand
But, Brian, the concern for costs ought to extend much farther,
such as to
the kinds of issues raised by an IESG Discuss so that the AD provides an
explanation of the benefit that justifies the considerable cost in
delay and wg
effort they are imposing...
Hence the DISCUSS criteria
Hi Dave, Brian,
Regarding one point regarding the WG status pages on the tools servers:
on 2006-12-19 15:51 Dave Crocker said the following:
[...]
3. Remove the documents list from the WG charter page, since it is
redundant with the Status page and less complete.
However, it contains
Dave,
Given that the Tools folk have created yet-another useful mechanism,
making each working group's page have a link to its related status
information now becomes a trivial effort, with substantial benefit.
This would be useful. (FWIW, I've already moved to using
only the tools page -- you
Dave Crocker wrote:
minor enhancement: Put a link to that page on the working group's
main IETF page.
There's a link to the Charter, isn't that the old main page ?
A working group's main page really is its home page and, therefore,
ought to bring together references to all relevant
Dave Crocker wrote:
Bill Fenner wrote:
Mike,
Check out http://tools.ietf.org/wg/wgname and see if that gives
you the view you're looking for.
Bill, thanks. I suspect that's what Michael has in mind, except for
one minor enhancement: Put a link to that page on the working group's
main
Hi Dave, Frank,
on 2006-12-18 17:20 Frank Ellermann said the following:
Dave Crocker wrote:
minor enhancement: Put a link to that page on the working group's
main IETF page.
Good idea. And actually already implemented some time ago. Looking
at for instance the mip4 charter page, at
Michael Thomas wrote:
Given that the Tools folk have created yet-another useful mechanism, making
each working group's page have a link to its related status information now
becomes a trivial effort, with substantial benefit.
Right, this is really cool -- although a link from the ietf wg page
Mike,
Check out http://tools.ietf.org/wg/wgname and see if that gives
you the view you're looking for.
Bill
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Bill Fenner wrote:
Mike,
Check out http://tools.ietf.org/wg/wgname and see if that gives
you the view you're looking for.
Bill, thanks. I suspect that's what Michael has in mind, except for one minor
enhancement: Put a link to that page on the working group's main IETF page.
A working
First I have to say that I really like the draft tracker, and kudos for
those responsible for making it happen. In fact, I like it so much that
it seems to me that it would be nice to have a link directly to it from
the working group page with its list of drafts. Ie:
draft-foowg-bardraft-00.txt
15 matches
Mail list logo
