Re: [hrpc] I-D Action: draft-irtf-hrpc-political-03.txt

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hiya,

FWIW, I don't think participation in the IETF is a useful
question for hrpc, though it is a useful question to study.
As to a venue, I'd say first do the work required and only
then bother to worry about venues - if the work is good,
people will find a place/way to discuss it in the IETF.

Meanwhile, more specifically...

On 12/07/2019 12:04, Niels ten Oever wrote:
> I think the the issue of participation would benefit from its own
> draft. Ideally it could show several trends:

Hmm - that "Ideally" is very odd. As I read it (which may
not be how it was meant) it implies a desire to find such
trends, which seems like the wrong place to start.

> 
> - consolidation -  total number of participants/draft authors/RFC
> authors/mailinglist contributors is affiliated to a low number of
> organizations - academic exodus 

"Exodus" reinforces the impression above. From my POV I
have not noticed changes in academic participation over the
last decade or so, other than perhaps a very small uptick.
Compared to 20+ years ago, yes, I think there are fewer
academics at IETF meetings. But I don't have numbers and
without those none of this can really be properly analysed.

So, the first step here is not, IMO, asking any powers that
be, but doing the background work if someone has the time
and interest. (I'd be interested in the results, but don't
have the time nor really enough interest to do the work,
sorry;-)

Cheers,
S.

> - decreasing number of
> participants/draft authors/RFC authors/mailinglist contributors is
> affiliated with an academic institution - geographical
> representation - diversity