Subject: Re: Is this an elephant? [Was: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process]

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 18 May 2013 10:07:43 +0200

The problem is that WG participants SHOULD follow/update their
milestones and take responsibility to progress work to thoes goals
direction. The Chair SHOULD follow the WG requests, or the Chair
SHOULD encourage discussing the milestones. I already requested before
that all WGs SHOULD discuss their milestones and update it in each
meeting or on the list. If no one cares then the result is WG failing
some-goals which no one realise until long, but some people outside
the IETF are watching such performance.

AB

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 7:29 PM, Keith Moore <moore at
> network-heretics.com> wrote:
>
>
> I don't think milestones will be useful unless and until:
>
> (a) they're defined in terms of not only concrete but also meaningful
> goals (e.g. "complete problem definition", "identify affected parties
> and groups representing their interests", "complete outline of initial
> design", but NOT "revise document X");
> (b) we start automatically suspending the activities of groups that
> fail to meet them (no meetings, no new I-Ds accepted, mailing list
> traffic blocked), until such groups are formally rechartered; and
> (c) IESG is reluctant to recharter groups that have repeatedly failed
> to meet milestones, especially if those groups haven't produced
> evidence of significant progress.
>

---

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 18 May 2013 10:14:05 +0200

> Instead of a WG progress report, what I had in mind was a separate report for each work item. The report should briefly describe

I agree with you totally, that work-item-report SHOULD be copied to AD
and WG. That report is needed mostly when the work does not target its
milestone, requesting new milestone with plans/reason.

AB

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 18 May 2013 12:40:03 +0100

> I already requested before that all WGs SHOULD
> discuss their milestones and update it in each
> meeting or on the list.

No-one cares what you requested.

Didn't you get banned from the MANET list for lack of useful content?

Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood