IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Qualitative Analysis of IETF and IESG trends (Re: Measuring IETF and IESG trends)

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Wed, 25 June 2008 23:28 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D00C28C15D; Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:28:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 425E828C108 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:28:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.226
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.226 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.825, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KvpTEJ0zNUvK for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:28:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5168D28C13E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:28:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=p3.JCK.COM) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1KBePj-000P94-8h; Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:28:35 -0400
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:28:34 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
Subject: Re: Qualitative Analysis of IETF and IESG trends (Re: Measuring IETF and IESG trends)
Message-ID: <38B2EAB856D35222B4F5A57C@p3.JCK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <4862BB84.4070401@gmail.com>
References: <20080624203548.D3A8D3A67FD@core3.amsl.com> <48622DEB.7060403@piuha.net> <486267E0.8080704@qualcomm.com> <48628ED6.1000800@piuha.net> <4862BB84.4070401@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org


--On Thursday, 26 June, 2008 09:41 +1200 Brian E Carpenter
<brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:

>...
> And of course, individual ADs
> have to think carefully whether a given issue is or is not
> worthy of a DISCUSS, and sometimes they get it wrong. But
> that will always be true, however we tune the process and
> procedures.

Brian,

While I agree with this, I also believe that there have to be
effective safeguards against bad judgments prevailing for too
long.  And I believe that those have largely slipped away from
us... unless we believe that making changes, unvalidated by WG
or mailing list consensus, simply to get a DISCUSS removed is
the right way to get to "high quality, relevant technical and
engineering documents...".

    john



_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email