IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] A question: Interim meeting

Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Thu, 28 July 2011 18:56 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8850D228017 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:56:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_22=0.6]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TUEL+3xaMvL1 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:56:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B72422800D for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:56:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p6SIuhRk024391; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 19:56:43 +0100
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk p6SIuhRk024391
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=200903; t=1311879403; bh=48559dTMOQINLl3+l92j5MEsP7s=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:References:To; b=s+A0dUSBE2aKPRt0U3TGgBBOimsV8g/oEuN+JnGOroFoEMdLTLwda5JOYmh30mGlV 24PxG/T8VXLUJqBllEZ6egu9w6tNJBEoVsk5vYQkfYE9DGdyGXB3Nv68GHPCtELFEj fakSN108QCwzbe18oCjglveAKC+49AYL3MnArVKc=
Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25d]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) envelope-from <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> with ESMTP id n6RJuh0366153254m0 ret-id none; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 19:56:43 +0100
Received: from [IPv6:2001:df8::112:cdec:599d:44e1:2385] ([IPv6:2001:df8:0:112:cdec:599d:44e1:2385]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p6SIuc7p012027 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 28 Jul 2011 19:56:39 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1244.3)
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <201107281656.p6SGu6a9009346@givry.fdupont.fr>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 19:56:37 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <EMEW3|d0f17223a0caba5f92026e222121c72fn6RJuh03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|18B15EF7-5F22-4E8F-AFD4-737A67E03B51@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
References: <201107281656.p6SGu6a9009346@givry.fdupont.fr> <18B15EF7-5F22-4E8F-AFD4-737A67E03B51@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, ops-ads@tools.ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1244.3)
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
X-smtpf-Report: sid=n6RJuh036615325400; tid=n6RJuh0366153254m0; client=relay,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=2:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: p6SIuhRk024391
X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Subject: Re: [v6ops] A question: Interim meeting
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 18:56:49 -0000

On 28 Jul 2011, at 17:56, Francis Dupont wrote:

> In your previous mail you wrote:
> 
>   [WEG] tl;dr version - speaking for myself, probably not, because I
>   think that more meetings is treating the symptom, not the
>   underlying cause. I think this is a charter/goals problem causing a
>   workload/meeting problem, not a workload problem causing a meeting
>   problem.
> 
> => I tried to find the reason for an interim meeting and this led me
> to the same conclusion...

I was quite surprised to see the volume of drafts at http://tools.ietf.org/wg/v6ops/, though only 4 are current WG active drafts, with 3 more at the IESG phase.

It's quite interesting the tools system includes/reveals some personal drafts from nearly 10 years ago.

It would be good to get some prioritisation on which drafts are the highest value to work on, if there's 4 WG drafts and about 35 personal drafts that are current (published/updated in 2011).

Tim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email