Re: End-run

Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com> Tue, 26 March 1996 18:58 UTC

Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa21043; 26 Mar 96 13:58 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa21039; 26 Mar 96 13:58 EST
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa10561; 26 Mar 96 13:58 EST
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa21032; 26 Mar 96 13:58 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa21028; 26 Mar 96 13:58 EST
Received: from stilton.cisco.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa10556; 26 Mar 96 13:58 EST
Received: from [171.69.128.114] (fred-mac-fr.cisco.com [171.69.128.114]) by stilton.cisco.com (8.6.8+c/8.6.5) with SMTP id KAA11516; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 10:58:05 -0800
X-Sender: fred@stilton.cisco.com
Message-Id: <v02140b2fad7dea49bfab@[171.69.128.114]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 10:58:08 -0800
To: iesg@CNRI.Reston.VA.US
X-Orig-Sender: iesg-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: End-run
Cc: iesg@CNRI.Reston.VA.US

At 1:02 PM 3/26/96, Steve Coya wrote:
>Sounds like it's time for the development of a long term (1-2 year)
>plan with "higher level" objectives and milestones, those which should
>be addressed by the WG objectives, with the WG G&Ms reflecting progress
>towards achieving those higher level goals.

I'm not sure that's reasonable for the IETF as a whole, but it seems like
it might be reasonable by area.

Suggestion: Joyce indicated that part of the agenda of our two day chat
might be to go over the various areas and cross-train/cross-fertilize. How
about each AD take an action item to put together a plan (to the best of
his/her ability, which will be understandably limited) such as is being
suggested here, and come prepared to present it to the rest of us? I'm
expecting something like a 10-20 minute overview of the area, including
this plan, and another 10-20 minutes of Q&A. Not that I'm going to cut it
off if we go over, but for level-setting purposes.

I would expect that the "operational" discussion might be quite a bit
longer, including Scott's question of "is this our problem and if it is
then how do we best address it?"

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
It has recently been discovered that research causes cancer in rats.