Subject: Re: 2013 review

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2014 15:37:18 +0100

My view (with comments) on this 2013 year related to IETF
(agreements&statements, community interest, documents&reviews),
General Area, and WGs:

For the IETF: Firstly, this year had excellent new methods introduced
for reveiwing documents which were established and more organised in
participation and review format. More new webpages for IETF areas are
organised and updated for volunteers and new/remote participants.
There are some documents with long process to become RFC which was
discussed but not evaluated.

Secondly, this year the community is interested in diversity but still
not much clear work was done in 2013, however, an assigned DT is
working on the requirements to report back may be in 2014 to the
community. This year the community discussed IESG performance and its
processing of WG documents, but still no interest clear in evaluation
from community to IESG work or no evaluation of WGs performance from
ADs.

Thirdly, this year 2013 included some statements/agreements the IETF
made with other organisation for the future progress, however, thoes
statements had many arguments which needs more work in the IETF
General Area.

For the IETF General Area: The Area is getting more involved with
community in providing more information and summarising things as this
below message with more and blogs within 2013 (from Feb 2013 Archived
until Dec, hoping to continue). Some figures of participation
statistics were published which is good for community progress. There
was also in this year more attention to help remote participation in
meetings, and also to discuss arranging meetings in other regions. The
community discussed shortage of ADs and increase in WGs, but still no
solutions. IMHO, this area is very important and needs more
organisation and improvement.

For IETF WGs: there was some individual documents sent to some related
WGs for review but still not much responses (this needs more
encouraging), and ADs or Chairs do try to mention to their WGs about
related issues in other works, but still no method for cross-WGs
involved other than AD announcements. No much interaction between IESG
and WGs, usually done through Chairs or authors, but still some times
in some issues the WG is excluded.

Wish you all the best for the new year 2014 with more volunteering
participations, new documents, new solutions, new ideas and
encouragements for IETF progress and future.

AB

On 12/31/13, IETF Chair <[email-masked]> wrote:
> The last day of the year seems like a good opportunity to reflect on some of
> the things that happened during 2013:
>
> http://www.ietf.org/blog/2013/12/2013-review/
>
> If you have additional thoughts or reflections on the past year - please
> share them!
>
> Jari
>
>

---

From: "Andrew G. Malis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2014 11:48:40 -0500

> in some issues the WG is excluded.

I personally think this is a WG-by-WG issue, and a lot rests on the
efforts of the ADs and relevant WG chairs to make sure that issues of
joint interest get cross-pollinated between WGs. There's been a lot of
work done in the routing area by the ADs and WG chairs to make sure
that WG participants are aware of related drafts or issues in other
WGs in the area. I agree that in general, cross-area interaction could
use a lot of work.

Cheers,
Andy