Re: IETF Challenges

[[e-mail] (Dale R. Worley)]

> From: Michael StJohns <[e-mail]>
> 
> At 07:38 AM 3/3/2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
> >Under the IETF role it is very easy of WG chairs to ignore
> >minority participants of large communities.
> 
> I've come to the conclusion - possibly wrong - that you're lacking
> some basic understanding in the operational model of the IETF.
> 
> Unlike most other standards bodies, the IETF tries to get good
> technical contributions from smart technical people, not based on
> voting status of their company or country.  If you have a good idea,
> [etc.]

Let me try to explain that point in a different way.

The model that the IETF attempts to follow -- and generally does
fairly well at following -- is to consider all participants as
*individuals* not as *representatives* (of particular companies, of
particular countries, or of particular communities).

"All may speak, but not all are listened to."  One is listened to
depending on one's reputation.  Basically, that reputation is
established by sound technical contribution.  It generally takes
around a year of useful contribution for one to gain a reputation.
However it is true that consistent attendance at IETF meetings will
improve the recognition of one's technical talents, if one has those
talents.

Occasionally a participant has attempted to enhance his influence by
declaring that his technical proposal is backed by his employer, which
is an economically powerful vendor.  Inevitably, this causes the
person to be considered to be an idiot, and his proposal is then
completely ignored.

Based on this, WG chairs find it easy to ignore -- and they are
*supposed* to place little weight on -- people whose contributions
have little technical merit, and conversely, they pay great attention
to people whose contributions consistently have technical merit.

Unfortunately, these factors mean that a smaller proportion of
respected contributors come from backgrounds or communities with lower
levels of education or less deployment of Internet technology -- there
is no mechanism, indeed, no intention, to ensure that various sectors
receive equal representation.  The IETF and the Internet Society have
tried in various ways to reduce the barriers (especially money
barriers) to participation for competent people from such backgrounds.
But if there are no competent people who can be attracted to
participate, that community will have no "representative" -- even if
that community has particular technical needs which the IETF desires
to satisfy.

In any particular instance, if one knows of some particular technical
consideration that is important for a particular community, and is
having trouble getting attention in a working group for that
consideration, it is useful to talk privately with various
well-respected members of the working group (including the chair(s))
to ask what course of action would be best for gaining the needed
attention.

Listen to the feedback.  If the advisers do not see the importance of
the issue, consider whether it really is important, and consider how
to make clearer its importance.  If the advisers suggest a course of
action, follow it.

Because reputations are built of doing good work in a series of
particular instances.

Dale