My thoughts about the problems of the IETF

John C Klensin john-ietf at jck.com
Tue May 6 15:49:04 CEST 2003



--On Tuesday, 06 May, 2003 10:04 -0700 Ted Hardie 
<hardie at qualcomm.com> wrote:

>...
> A transcript is a sufficiently low-filter that a clerk could
> do it from a recording (not that this a job I would wish on
> _anyone_, by the way).  But the medium filter work is actually
> harder--"The group discussed the merits of Frobnitzzles vs.
> Whangdoodles for 15 minutes, with Randy's view that
> Whangdoodles are operationally easier to deploy winning the
> day over Steve's view that Frobnitzzles provide a better model
> for confidentiality".  Creating that kind of summary requires
> both a lot of knowledge of the background and a good ability
> to boil disconnected, sometimes overlapping statements into a
> coherent whole.  In working groups, a participant usual does
> that job exactly because they can understand the discussion
> well enough to record actions and summarize discussion.  Note
> that the high filter summary is actually easier--"The group
> approved Whangdoodles for Proposed Standard" being something
> that the Secretariat can confirm at the end of discussion in
> real time.

Ted, it seems to me that there are points between your "low" and 
"medium" filter points that might add a lot of information for 
the community without creating an unreasonable burden.  Taking 
your example, "The group approved Whangdoodles for Proposed 
Standard after an extensive discussion of the Frobnitzzle 
alternative" contains much more information.   It doesn't 
summarize the arguments, which I agree is hard, but knowing that 
the IESG considered an alternative carefully, rather than just 
signing off, provides a lot of information to the reader... and 
a foundation for further questions if that seems to be 
appropriate.  And it eliminates community concerns that the 
alternative was not even considered.

best,
   john







More information about the Problem-statement mailing list