what is a problem

[Kurt D. Zeilenga]

At 03:39 PM 2002-11-14, Leslie Daigle wrote:
>we (for the largest value of we) haven't agreed on the problem yet.

I am not sure we can agree on what the problem is.  We might
just have to treat the symptoms we all generally find the
most bothersome.  However, we do need to be very careful
that our so-called remedies don't do more harm than good.

In particular, we should be leery of process changes.
Personally, I would rather we, individually and collectively,
focus on non-process changes which will help our existing
process work better.

The I-D tracker are a good thing.  Extensions to provide
more detail on about in-process I-Ds are clearly welcomed.
And, likely, tools to provide detail about other processes
(such an "expired in grade" RFC tracker ) are likely
welcomed as well. 

The security tutorial is a good thing.  Other tutorials
would be welcomed.  I, for one, would like to see a "nits
tutorial" offered.  (It's amazing how much time we waste
on nits.)

I'd like to see an colloquiums offered.  These would, I
think, be helpful in develop our architectural knowledge
base.

We also should be sure we've exhausted all of the existing
process mechanisms before resorting to process change.  Have
we made full use of directorates?  Have we made full use
of AD-assigned "experts"?

Kurt