Re: [edu-discuss] Is the EDU team ossified?

[SM <[e-mail]>]

Hi Spencer,
At 13:30 28-03-2013, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
>And for what it's worth, the IAB is meeting during the current 
>Sunday afternoon slots - at least the first one, and maybe both - so 
>we can't drop in and answer questions.

It may be better not to stretch out I* members by pushing them into 
slots just because they don't have another meeting to attend.

I spent two and a half hours discussing with someone new to the 
IETF.  The person followed the Newcomer session a few weeks ago.  I 
used the term "process documents" and I had to explain what I meant 
by that.  The person had a view of the "initial draft to publication" 
process which was, in my opinion, too formal.  The IESG was viewed as 
an authority instead of part of a process where people have to be 
coaxed into coming to agreement.  I tried to explain to the person 
not to push issues which could be resolved at the lower layers to the top.

A long time ago Peter Koch posted some comments about terms used in 
the IETF [1].  I use some of those terms too.  The IETF way is to 
document those terms so that people can understand them.  It ends up 
as higher barrier for these people, i.e. the IETF expects people to 
follow its culture.

My sense is that the current discussion might not be viewed as worthy 
of changes.  I am ok with that as I am not interested in breaking any 
stone wall. :-)

Regards,
-sm

1. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/edu-discuss/current/msg00047.html