IETF problem pinpointing - the followup

[john.loughney@nokia.com]

Hi all,

> - an introduction, by me, saying "Here is the current state of the =
IETF,=20
> here's what I think we've been good at, here's what I think we've =
improved,=20
> here's what I think needs work"
>=20
> - a series of 4 or 5 "problem statements", each focusing on one or two =

> important issues, and NOT overlapping, given by different people, who =
each=20
> spend 4-8 minutes talking. (Slides present beforehand - no switching =
laptops!)

Sounds good.
>=20
> - a summary (me again) saying "those are some perspectives,=20
> now what do we do next?"
>=20
> Then it's open mike time.

Also works for me.

> The point of the presentation format (seen as theater) is:
>=20
> - to show that the IETF leadership (represented by me) is=20
> aware of the need  for change, and wants to get the ball rolling
> - to show that the IETF community is THE central part of the=20
> effort, and  must be depended on to both formulate the problems and =
find=20
> the solutions

I agree.

> So the questions for this list is:
>=20
> - Do you think this plan sounds sensible?

Yes.

> - What are the issues we want raised during the problem-session?

Transparency - decisions & policies must be documented.

Accountability - if some work is stopped, blocked or sent back to
the working group, then someone needs to clearly point out the problems
& be available for follow-up questions.  (I have gotten cryptic comments
on drafts from the IESG, which I was unable to decipher ...)

Community support - IESG / IAB / Directorates may need to serve as =
technical
consultants for some WG discussions.  It is not acceptable to leave a WG =
alone
for a long time and then only to get involved after the WG thinks it has =
completed
its work (i.e. - WG last call has completed).

Education & training - some way to better train chairs, editors, etc.  =
For=20
example, the security area has long complained that there are not enough
security gurus - so, how do get more?  I have some WG members very
interested in security, writing analysis drafts - security ADs asked to =
see
the documents, but have never gotten back to us.  It would be better
to induct security gurus into the secret security society so that there
are more gurus to go around.

> - Who should present them?

WG chairs - who should feel free to complain about WG members & IESG
members ;)=20

John