Problems vs Social Dynamics (Re: IESG proposed statement on theIETF mission)

Spencer Dawkins spencer at mcsr-labs.org
Thu Oct 16 08:53:58 CEST 2003


... and, if we don't already have a problem statement, that's a
problem, too ...

Seriously, Brian wasn't very excited about an IESG-only/non-IESG+IAB
mission statement, and I take his point. I have to say that I'm still
wondering what more than two or three people on IESG think of the
current problem statement draft, too.

The contributions from IESG members have been very helpful. In the
absence of a Process specification with WG oomph behind it, we seem to
be (per the last Plenary) looking expectantly at the IESG as a group
to respond to the problem statement draft. At least, that was my
take - did I get it wrong?

Any plans to respond at plenary time?

Spencer

p.s. I would have checked the Plenary minutes for confirmation, but
I'm getting a 404 from
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/03jul/index.html :-{

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Melinda Shore" <mshore at cisco.com>
To: "Harald Tveit Alvestrand" <harald at alvestrand.no>
Cc: <problem-statement at alvestrand.no>
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:38 AM
Subject: Re: Problems vs Social Dynamics (Re: IESG proposed statement
on theIETF mission)


> On Thursday, October 16, 2003, at 05:43 AM, Harald Tveit Alvestrand
> wrote:
> > The discussion of "social dynamics" documents an attempt to
understand
> > *why* we have the problems we have, rather than naming the
specific
> > problems
>
> Arguably the problem-statement document was to have done that.
> At any rate my primary concern is that the draft of the IESG
> statement makes a start at articulating a mission but drifts
> towards problem description in the second half, and I think
> there's a strong sense within the organization that we really
> need a clear mission statement.
>
> Melinda
>



More information about the Problem-statement mailing list