Hi Everyone.  Well!  Here's the thing.

I think we've all noticed that progress in the working group has ground to a 
halt.  We should try to understand why this is and choose an appropriate course 
of action.  To that end, some of the interested parties met by phone earlier 
this week.

There was a suggestion that the fact that many of the authors are new to the 
IETF (and unfamiliar with the process and culture) has caused confusion and 
paralysis. In this regard, I would like to add a personal plea: we are ALL 
responsible for the quality and progression of this work, so when we see one of 
our experts slip up procedurally, can we just gently coach them in the right 
way, with an explanation?
It was also suggested that the quantity of comment that we see will increase 
once the documents are adopted as working group drafts.  Some authors had 
interpreted the paucity of comment as an indication of low interest.  Maybe the 
quantity will increase once we have working group drafts to consider.

Eventually we agreed that the work remained an important precursor to future 
design work in other forums with the objective of  fixing problems identified 
by the current work.

Therefore, it was decided that we WILL meet in Vancouver.  But, in the event 
that there is still no substantial progress at that time, then we will move to 
close down the working group.  In order to gauge whether the prospects for 
success have improved, I was tasked with recruiting more authors for each 
document.  We agreed that the current slate of authors is perfectly well 
qualified and able to complete the work.  But, we need to create a 
"micro-community" in which discussion will be more active.  All the designated 
authors will be expected to contribute to and review their documents.  The 
discussion between authors should be on the mail-list and, hopefully, that will 
help to get the broader community engaged.

It was also suggested that, even if we do not manage to recruit more authors, 
but there is, nevertheless, other evidence of community interest and progress, 
then we would still keep the activity alive.

The expectation is that additional authors will be identified by 16 Oct, and 
drafts of all documents will be available by the Vancouver submission deadline.

I'm hopeful that we can get this work moving forward again.

All the best.  Tim.
_______________________________________________
wpkops mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wpkops

Reply via email to