Draft minutes from San Francisco
dhc at dcrocker.net
Mon Apr 7 11:22:35 CEST 2003
MS> Working Group Participation and the "Stuckee Problem" - Ted Hardie
MS> The discussion is abstracted from and I-D that's
MS> solutions-based. The IETF working style of an Open working
MS> group on mailing lists has produced successful results, but
MS> making a comment doesn't mean you're taking responsibility
MS> for doing work. It's difficult to make anyone other than WG
MS> chairs and current authors accountable. The problem is how
MS> to track commitment without breaking openness and shutting
MS> out outside review.
MS> Dave Crocker said that we have people who consume resources
MS> but don't help make process. Ted said that may be true but
perhaps the word is supposed to be "progress" rather than "process"?
MS> that isn't the problem he's looking at. Dave said that may
MS> be theoretically true, but isn't this a test for working
MS> groups getting formed?
Unfortunately, I do not understand the above summary of my interaction
My general point was that the ability of a working group to make
progress is the test of its viability. If it cannot make progress, it is
not viable. The mere fact of better bookkeeping -- signing up people's
names -- does not alter actual work done.
Dave Crocker <mailto:dcrocker at brandenburg.com>
Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
Sunnyvale, CA USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>, <fax:+1.866.358.5301>
More information about the Problem-statement