At 02:59 PM 4/8/2002 +0200, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: >one reading of the data is to see what has happened in the past, in order >to see what's reasonable to expect from the future.
yes. and another is to consider whether we are satisfied with what is happening now. >for instance, it is not uncommon for a WG to expect to produce an RFC less >than 6 months after it starts. > >the fact that it almost never happens is an indication that one may want >to be skeptical about charters that specify it - and ask what the >extraordinary measures are that the chairs intend to apply to achieve that >goal. Another, very different reaction to the disparity between promise and accomplishment is to ensure that working groups meet their milestones. To carry this to an extreme: If it is not reasonable for a working group to achieve a 6-month (or 12-month, or whatever is being proposed) milestone, is the effort ready to be an IETF working group? This takes the view that it may be exactly proper to target a 6-month milestone, and that what is improper is not reaching it. So, rather than simply challenging the specification of an aggressive milestone, we could seek aggressive management that will achieve it. Perhaps a middle ground is to be aggressive in demanding that the working group folks substantiate why anyone should believe the milestones... d/ ---------- Dave Crocker <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com> tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850
