John C Klensin wrote:
If an effort is worthy of adoption by the Internet, surely it
is reasonable to demand that it have enough support to be able
to obtain its own means of ensuring that the writing is
adequate.
We may find that there is more market for some protocols --and,
Given the number of different working groups that have produced
diffiult to read documents for RFC publication,
the indications are that we are missing some necessary ingredient for
achieving this within the working group process.
I do not know if we lack the skills, incentives, or resources,
Doug - you said something really important here about advancing the IETF's
collaborative processes by inducting them atop a groupware solution.
Meanwhile, there is a lot of good work going on with other VCS
platforms that might be even better. (And don't even get me started on how
useful it
I want to ask some questions about the 3rd parties who are providing the
IETF's WG's with their Mailing List services... (This posting is appropriate
to both lists since the Mailing List Archive represents a considerable
amount of the IETF IP that it claims it is controlling here in IPR). So...
Eliot - BTW
What's the difference between an RFP and an RFC by the way? - don't both
require some review process for the Request for part of it?
Just asking as its a semantics issue .
T
- Original Message -
From: Eliot Lear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: todd glassey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL
A web based submission model would be better - it could actually step the
submitter through the template sections and give them guidance on the text.
Hell readability tools are available from any of the online library tool
sources so this is not an issue either.
The millstone here is that the
Whoops, sorry. I meant the upcoming weekend when I wrote the message
(the weekend after the IEEE meeting).
On 7/22/06, Scott W Brim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 07/19/2006 20:08 PM, Clint Chaplin allegedly wrote:
Another data point; San Diego is hosting Comic-Con this weekend:
they're
John C Klensin wrote:
I commend draft-carpenter-ietf-disputes-00 as an attempt to
rethink this area. People who are interested in this topic
should probably study it.
Yes, it's interesting. With a mandatory attempt of peaceful
settlement, probably a good idea. But I won't subscribe to
|
