Subject: Re: WG Last Call on IETF Problem Statement

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 15:04:58 +0200

Ship it. We are way beyond the point of diminishing returns on this.

   Brian

avri wrote:
> 
> This note marks the beginning of the WG Last call for:
> 
>      Title : IETF Problem Statement
>      Author(s) : E. Davies
>      Filename : draft-ietf-problem-issue-statement-03.txt
>      Pages : 24
>      Date : 2003-8-26
> 
> The document can be found at:
> 
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-problem-issue-statement-03.txt
> 
> Because of the US holiday on Monday , 1- Sept, the last call will extend from now, 31 August until 16 September (any time zone).
> 
> Please send your comments to the WG mailing list [email-masked]
> 
> thanks
> 
> a.
> 
> Avri Doria
> co-chair

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 10:42:37 +0100

All,

My two cents worth... I drafted this a few weeks ago, and then sat on it,
because it seemed superfluous.  However, since we are now discussing how to
move the Process Document forward again...

I agree pretty much with what Harald wrote recently. We should propose
different processes, where they are needed to progress.  Let's move forward
quickly where we can, as supported by the Vienna IESG Plenary.

On the other hand, I think some problems may require a new and slower
process, e.g. the type of problem which can't just be handed over to the
IESG to resolve ( too much IESG power, etc. ).

Practically, this means examining each problem, and proposing a suitable
process to deal with it.  This could take the form of a simple table/matrix.

	Regards,

	Graham Travers

	International Standards Manager
	BT Exact

	e-mail:   [email-masked]
	tel:      +44(0) 1359 235086
	mobile:   +44(0) 7808 502536
	fax:      +44(0) 1359 235087

	HWB279, PO Box 200,London, N18 1ZF, UK

	BTexact Technologies is a trademark of British Telecommunications
plc
	Registered office: 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ
	Registered in England no. 1800000

	This electronic message contains information from British
Telecommunications plc which may be privileged or confidential. The
information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) or entity
named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any
disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information
is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please
notify us by telephone or email (to the numbers or address above)
immediately.

-----Original Message-----
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: 02 September 2003 22:52
To: Melinda Shore
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Moving the process document forward

--On 2. september 2003 14:01 -0700 Dave Crocker <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Melinda,
>
> MS> we do need input on the question of how to tackle the
> MS> restructuring (if it's agreed that it's necessary) question,
> MS> whether it's details on how to construct a blue-ribbon panel
> MS> or to recommend kicking the whole thing over to the IESG.
>
> The situation is a bit worse than that.
>
> Other than general references to "restructuring" we do not have anything
> concretely specifying what that means, nevermind whether we have
> consensus to pursue it.

I think the WG has the following chartered work item:

> As a second work item, the group will also produce a proposal for a
> process to develop solutions to the problems identified by this working
> group.

Since we know what the problems are (modulo objections to -issue-03, which 
I haven't seen much of), there should be at least some possibility of 
suggesting the required process for fixing them.

This may come in the form of (problem, suggested solution, 
how-to-get-there) descriptions, or it may come in the form of (problem, 
needed investigation, range of solutions) descriptions; I personally don't 
think all of our problems will be solved by a single fell-swoop solution - 
different problems may require different approaches, so there are probably 
multiple things that can be suggested, refined and adopted - but I think 
the proposals need to be anchored into "what problem are we trying to 
solve".

(Yes, I AM working on delivering what I think the IESG was charged with in 
Vienna - proposing at least some process to deal with at least some of the 
problems. It's not ready for publication yet.)

                                Harald