Thoughts About the Process Document

[john.loughney at nokia.com]

Hi Margaret,

> Which of the problems do we consider to be the most
> important and urgent to fix?
> 
> What type of process would make the most sense?  Do
> we want an iterative process (pick a couple of
> well-understood problems, address those, then re-asses)?
> Or would we prefer to start work on all of the
> problems in parallel?
> 
> As we develop a process to change the IETF, what are
> the things that we _don't_ want to change?
> 
> What are the core values of the IETF that should be
> reflected in our processes (openness, fairness,
> community consensus, etc.)?
> 
> In this resource constrained environment, what balance
> do we want to strike between working to improve the
> IETF and minimizing impact on ongoing work?  How can we
> solve our problems in a way that is minimally disruptive
> to current work?
> 
> To what extent will our process choices influence or
> constrain the solution spaces?
> 
> What process options are available (asking the IETF
> leadership to make internal changes, forming design teams,
> forming WGs, what else?)?  Do we think that it will be
> possible to use the process of the IETF to fix the
> higher-impact problems, solutions for which may include
> fairly major changes to the IETF organizational structure?

While you questions are not bad, I'd prefer to cut to the
chase.  I'd ask: have we identified places where the IETF
process has broken down?  If yes, fix; if no, continuing
digging into the problem ares.

John