Subject: [RAI] Draft minutes of the RAI open area meeting in Quebec

From: Gonzalo Camarillo <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:03:31 +0300

Folks,

you can find the draft minutes of our last meeting under the link below:

http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/minutes/raiarea.txt

Cheers,

Gonzalo

---

From: Mary Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:11:52 -0500

In the summary it states:

" Some people find it difficult to keep track of all the new WGs being
chartered. Two options are to automatically subscribe people who were
active in the chartering discussions on the DISPATCH list (opt-out
solution) and to highlight the chartering of new WGs on the DISPATCH
list so that interested parties can subscribe to their lists (opt-in
solution)."

We already do the latter, so it's really a matter of whether folks
want the former done, which I think is totally unnecessary since we
post the new WGs on the DISPATCH WG wiki.  I think the problem is that
folks don't use the resources that are available.

There's a nit in the notes:
" On splices, do not think they have ever met"
I was referring to SALUD.

Regards,

Mary.

On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Gonzalo Camarillo <
[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> RAI mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rai
>

---

From: Gonzalo Camarillo <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 18:21:50 +0300

Hi Mary,

> " Some people find it difficult to keep track of all the new WGs
> being chartered. Two options are to automatically subscribe people
> who were active in the chartering discussions on the DISPATCH list
> (opt-out solution) and to highlight the chartering of new WGs on the
> DISPATCH list so that interested parties can subscribe to their lists
> (opt-in solution)."
> 
> post the new WGs on the DISPATCH WG wiki.  I think the problem is
> that folks don't use the resources that are available.

yes, this is the discussion we need to have. If somebody thinks we
should do the former instead, feel free to speak up.

Thanks,

Gonzalo

---

From: "Thomson, Martin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 07:08:44 +0800

> folks don't use the resources that are available.

"Welcome to ietf-honest".  

I'd rather not be automatically be subscribed to anything.  Encouragement to do so doesn't go astray.

---

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 10:58:42 -0500

> I'd rather not be automatically be subscribed to anything.  Encouragement to do so doesn't go astray.

I'm not certain whether the notes were referring to my suggestion or to 
a similar one from someone else. But this is pretty far removed from 
what I proposed (recognizable as similar only by the concept of 
automatically seeding email list subscribers).

I wasn't suggesting anything happen automatically. I was suggesting that 
the RAI area maintain a list: a list that people must take explicit 
action to add themselves to. And, when a new RAI-area mailing list is 
created, the initial subscribers will be populated from this list of 
people who have gone out of their way to explicitly indicate that this 
is something they want to happen.

/a

---

From: Daryl Malas <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:57:31 -0600

All,

Just to clarify, my statement "Wanted to kill a draft, but no one could
say no" is not a fair representation of the work done by the ADs involved
at the time or the context of the discussions.  My point was the confusion
that resulted from trying to decide the best area/wg for the draft
ultimately did not help the circumstances.  In the end, the result turned
out good, and it also resulted in developing a framework document for
future similar work.  I simply think there needs to be better clarity on
who is responsible for what and where, along with efforts to provide the
right level of visibility to all of the necessary sets of eyes relevant to
the work.

Regards,

Daryl