At 9:32 AM -0800 7/30/10, Melinda Shore wrote: >Yoav Nir wrote: >>First is people who have an idea they want to present, > > but that idea either doesn't fit the charter of any >> particular working group (or they don't know about such a >> working group), or else said working group's schedule >> is too full with existing work. > >The way that's traditionally done is with an internet draft.
Bingo. The number of scheduled-but-ad-hoc BoFs that had fleshed-out ideas but no drafts was distressing. One of the big lessons learned from the current situation: people have forgotten that writing initial drafts is both easy and non-committal. If you're worried about writing a draft that turns out to be a bad idea, just write something humorous and self-deprecating about that in the abstract. >The implication that there needs to be a session, with a room >and slides and humans sitting in chairs, kind of suggests that >people who want to participate in the IETF have to attend >meetings. "participate" is too strong a word. Scheduled-but-ad-hoc BoFs now have the same unfortunate properties of many WGs, namely that 80+% of the people there are only there to listen, not help. A true bar BoF eliminates most of them due to the intimacy. --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
