Subject: Dedicated list for technical discussions

From: Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2010 11:06:20 +1000

I know it's been brought up many times before, but I'd appreciate a separate list for technical discussions regarding drafts, etc., since this list seems to have become a travel tips forum.

--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/

---

From: "Glen Zorn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2010 15:12:31 +0700

Mark Nottingham [mailto://[email-masked]] writes:

> I know it's been brought up many times before, but I'd appreciate a
> separate list for technical discussions regarding drafts, etc., since
> this list seems to have become a travel tips forum.

I'm sure that if you have some specific technical topics to discuss at least
some of us would be willing to join in.  I must note, however, that your own
posts to this list over the last month or so have been about the Maastrict
venue, IETF Logo wear and this complaint (not exactly rocket science ;-).

...

---

From: Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2010 19:09:09 +1000

Touche.  When in Rome...

---

From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2010 08:17:25 -0400

IETF in Rome?

Do I need a visa, is there a subway?

On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 5:09 AM, Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]> wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>

-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/

---

From: Dave Cridland <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 19:42:32 +0100

> venue, IETF Logo wear and this complaint (not exactly rocket  

I would note that these items are precisely the kinds of things that  
we, as an organization, are utterly ill-equipped to handle. We cannot  
use our tried and tested bureaucratic techniques to mitigate  
time-consuming discussion - we cannot insist people write a draft,  
propose a BOF, etc before actually discussing the issue.

Therefore, I suggest - and quite seriously, as I assure you I would  
never joke about something so serious as this - that a new area be  
formed forthwith to tackle what's obviously more important than any  
mere technical issue. This new area - perhaps entitled the Hotel  
Organizational Logistic Strategies area, could be home to a number of  
key working groups, aimed at solving these fundamental issues that  
plague us all.

With this in mind, I firmly look forward to seeing a requirements  
document for the area, such that we can progress by initiating BOFs,  
with a view to forming working groups to create further requirement  
documents.

Dave.
-- 
Dave Cridland - mailto:[email-masked] - xmpp:[email-masked]
  - acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
  - http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade

---

From: Scott Brim <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 15:27:16 -0400

> Do I need a visa, is there a subway?

and even a Pizza Hut

---

From: Randall Gellens <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 13:53:11 -0700

At 7:42 PM +0100 8/30/10, Dave Cridland wrote:

>  I would note that these items are precisely the kinds of things 
> that we, as an organization, are utterly ill-equipped to handle. We 
> cannot use our tried and tested bureaucratic techniques to mitigate 
> Organizational Logistic Strategies area, could be home to a number 
> of key working groups, aimed at solving these fundamental issues 
> that plague us all.

Well, we have in the past dealt with process and organizational 
issues using a WG (although I can't recall which area).  But I'm not 
sure we need a new area.

-- 
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly selected tag: ---------------
If you attack stupidity you attack an entrenched interest with friends
in government and every walk of public life, and you will make small
progress against it.                               --Samuel Marchbanks

---

From: Melinda Shore <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 14:25:59 -0800

On Aug 30, 2010, at 12:53 PM, Randall Gellens wrote:
> 
> Well, we have in the past dealt with process and organizational issues using a WG (although I can't recall which area).  But I'm not sure we need a new area.

These have been in the General area.

Melinda