Need for an Agenda Cutoff date?
Hi, all, With agendas appearing ever later - including last night, the issue of cutoff dates should be revisited. If reading the drafts to be discussed is NOT an issue, then the I-D cutoff dates should be dropped. If reading the drafts IS an issue, then, by correlary, there should be a corresponding cutoff date for agendas - e.g., 1 week after the last cutoff I-D date. Jjust as I-Ds that pass the cutoffs are not published for this IETF, WGs that fail to meet that deadline should be CANCELLED. Consider this a proposal, or at least a request. Joe signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Need for an Agenda Cutoff date?
It seems the cutoff is more often a driver to get updates written, and 00 drafts kicked off. One alternative is to review other means to encourage timely and regular draft updates? This might help distribute the load through the year rather than into three hectic chokepoints. Tim On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 08:03:16AM -0800, Joe Touch wrote: > Hi, all, > > With agendas appearing ever later - including last night, the issue of > cutoff dates should be revisited. > > If reading the drafts to be discussed is NOT an issue, then the I-D > cutoff dates should be dropped. > > If reading the drafts IS an issue, then, by correlary, there should be a > corresponding cutoff date for agendas - e.g., 1 week after the last > cutoff I-D date. Jjust as I-Ds that pass the cutoffs are not published > for this IETF, WGs that fail to meet that deadline should be CANCELLED. > > Consider this a proposal, or at least a request. > > Joe > ___ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf -- Tim ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Need for an Agenda Cutoff date?
Joe Touch wrote: Hi, all, With agendas appearing ever later - including last night, the issue of cutoff dates should be revisited. If reading the drafts to be discussed is NOT an issue, then the I-D cutoff dates should be dropped. If reading the drafts IS an issue, then, by correlary, there should be a corresponding cutoff date for agendas - e.g., 1 week after the last cutoff I-D date. Jjust as I-Ds that pass the cutoffs are not published for this IETF, WGs that fail to meet that deadline should be CANCELLED. Consider this a proposal, or at least a request. +1 Julian (still wondering whether there'll be a WebDAV WG meeting -- neither is an agenda available, nor was there any announcement on the WG's mailing list) -- bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760 ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Need for an Agenda Cutoff date?
Joe, There is an agenda cutoff that WG chairs are supposed to respect. This time it was: > The agenda for the Working Group is due by Monday, > February 28 at 12:00 ET (17:00 GMT). But there were many late agendas and there was a glitch in the process of posting them. For BOFs, the formal BOF proposal must include an agenda, and that was due this time on February 21. We need to try and follow our own rules next time. Brian Joe Touch wrote: Hi, all, With agendas appearing ever later - including last night, the issue of cutoff dates should be revisited. If reading the drafts to be discussed is NOT an issue, then the I-D cutoff dates should be dropped. If reading the drafts IS an issue, then, by correlary, there should be a corresponding cutoff date for agendas - e.g., 1 week after the last cutoff I-D date. Jjust as I-Ds that pass the cutoffs are not published for this IETF, WGs that fail to meet that deadline should be CANCELLED. Consider this a proposal, or at least a request. Joe ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Need for an Agenda Cutoff date?
Brian E Carpenter wrote: Joe, There is an agenda cutoff that WG chairs are supposed to respect. This time it was: > The agenda for the Working Group is due by Monday, > February 28 at 12:00 ET (17:00 GMT). But there were many late agendas and there was a glitch in the process of posting them. For BOFs, the formal BOF proposal must include an agenda, and that was due this time on February 21. We need to try and follow our own rules next time. What we have, IMO, is a deadline, but not a "cutoff" - as in "miss the date and you don't get to hold your WG". Joe Brian Joe Touch wrote: Hi, all, With agendas appearing ever later - including last night, the issue of cutoff dates should be revisited. If reading the drafts to be discussed is NOT an issue, then the I-D cutoff dates should be dropped. If reading the drafts IS an issue, then, by correlary, there should be a corresponding cutoff date for agendas - e.g., 1 week after the last cutoff I-D date. Jjust as I-Ds that pass the cutoffs are not published for this IETF, WGs that fail to meet that deadline should be CANCELLED. Consider this a proposal, or at least a request. Joe ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Need for an Agenda Cutoff date?
Brian E Carpenter wrote: Joe, There is an agenda cutoff that WG chairs are supposed to respect. This time it was: > The agenda for the Working Group is due by Monday, > February 28 at 12:00 ET (17:00 GMT). But there were many late agendas and there was a glitch in the process of posting them. Guilty (IPoIB WG Chair here) - now solution space For BOFs, the formal BOF proposal must include an agenda, and that was due this time on February 21. We need to try and follow our own rules next time. Time to get Hard about this - if WG agendas aren't published by the cutoff date - the WG doesn't meet. Anyone I've ever talked to says good meeting practice includes publishing an agenda - if there isn't enough interest in publishing an agenda, there isn't enough interest in attending a meeting. If a WG is scheduled to meet on the cutoff date and there isn't an agenda published on the cutoff - a message goes to the WG chair (and maybe to the WG as well) with a warning and if they don't get an agenda to the IETF in 24 hours... CANCEL THE MEETING Brian - is this going to be your first contribution to the IETF as the incoming chair ? Bill (who would have had his meeting cancelled today with these rules - but this is the right thing to do) Brian Joe Touch wrote: Hi, all, With agendas appearing ever later - including last night, the issue of cutoff dates should be revisited. If reading the drafts to be discussed is NOT an issue, then the I-D cutoff dates should be dropped. If reading the drafts IS an issue, then, by correlary, there should be a corresponding cutoff date for agendas - e.g., 1 week after the last cutoff I-D date. Jjust as I-Ds that pass the cutoffs are not published for this IETF, WGs that fail to meet that deadline should be CANCELLED. Consider this a proposal, or at least a request. Joe ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Need for an Agenda Cutoff date?
--On Monday, March 07, 2005 12:02 PM -0800 Joe Touch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: What we have, IMO, is a deadline, but not a "cutoff" - as in "miss the date and you don't get to hold your WG". I would not mind this (and I'm batting 0.500 wrt "my" groups; at least I got the final one in last week...), but there's also a "carrot" approach. It used to be that the chairs got reminded a week or so before the agendas were due to send them in. This no longer happens. It should not be required, but it was a nice reminder, and would have prodded me to being on time with both. --Matt ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
