RE: Fundamental changes in IETF discussions? (was: Re: Messages from the ietf list for the week ending Sun Dec 27 06:00:02 2020)

[Hannes Tschofenig <[e-mail]>]

Hi Eliot,

This email crossed my radar and I had to smile when I read your statement about "IoT has been particularly harmed by this fragmentation, but it is surely not alone."

If you think that separate discussion lists are the reason for the problems you mention below then you are on the wrong track.

As you know, I have repeatedly pointed out that there is a risk with fragmentation in IoT and mentioned it at WG meetings, at plenaries, to IESG members, and to individuals involved in the work.

The desire to reinvent the wheel is quite strong. So, we are essentially standardizing everything that comes to our minds.

Ciao
Hannes

-----Original Message-----
From: ietf <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Eliot Lear
Sent: Monday, December 28, 2020 1:55 PM
To: John C Klensin <[e-mail]>
Cc: John Levine <[e-mail]>; The IETF List <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Fundamental changes in IETF discussions? (was: Re: Messages from the ietf list for the week ending Sun Dec 27 06:00:02 2020)

Hi,

> On 27 Dec 2020, at 18:42, John C Klensin <[e-mail]> wrote:

> However, I wonder if we are not losing something by what appears to me
> to be a growing trend to separate discussion topics off into
> topic-specific lists and to do so fairly early in the life cycle of
> topics and clusters of discussions.

+1.

Either we are a community or we are not.  IMHO we have reason to act as a community, because one result of not being one is a lack of situational awareness on the part of participants with regard to relevant work that takes place in areas they may not normally follow.  This in turn leads to disparate incompatible approaches, rather than architectural building blocks that the IESG alone cannot possibly scale to address.  IoT has been particularly harmed by this fragmentation, but it is surely not alone.

Of course, being part of a community entails responsibilities as well as privileges.  Part of that responsibility is a code of conduct to which members agree and adhere.  Rapid fire responses, and ad hominem attacks have played a role in diminishing the plenary function of this list, as some lamented earlier this year.

My view: some new thinking is needed about this.

Eliot

IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.