Straw process outline for dealing with structural and practic

[Jeanette Hofmann]

On 18 Jul 2003 at 11:18, Scott Bradner wrote:

> 
> I think this proposal combines many of the suggestions from Harald's 
> slide 

Really? I am not aware that anybody proposed such a model yesterday as 
described in Elwyn's mail. 

that did not get consensus - I do not think it is a good idea
> to do anything so formal at this time 

Our proposal emerged as a response to the problem working group meeting. 
While there was support for the issue document and the short term 
improvements of the process document, we seemed to get stuck in a dead 
end with regard to those problems that affect the IETF's structure. People 
clearly didn't like the idea to delegate those structural issues to a working 
group. Or so we thought. That is why we tried to develop a different model, 
which would be, perhaps, less cumbersome and also integrate more people 
than a wg. Equipped with clear deadlines, our model would lead to quicker 
results. Results that reflect only those issues, which attract contributions from 
the IETF. 
With this plan, we thought, we avoid frustration about the fact that not much 
has changed since Yokohama. 

Now, some people say they want to see some visible changes soon while 
others caution about moving too fast. Hmmm, is there a non frustrating path 
out of this? 

 
> lets solicit ideas (as IDs) over the next 60 (or 30) days then discuss
> them for a fixed time (e.g. 30 days) and see where we are at that point.

Actually, Scott, this is not entirely different from what our model proposes. Is 
it the Synthesis and Answer Panel, that you find too formal?

Jeanette 

> 
> I fully expect that a consensus would have been reached on some
> of the problem solutions - we could then focus on the others
> 
> I was one who answered Harald's 'do we have to do something in 3 years'
> question with a 'yes' but I see no reason to try and reform a 17 year old
> organization in a few months - unseemly haste at best - lets take the time
> to do it correctly (that does not mean we should do nothing for the next
> year)
> 
> Scott