Subject: [newtrk] Posters to this list

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 01:20:00 +0200

Just to give you an idea of the size of the community that's debating the 
issues currently in front of this WG...... which tells you exactly nothing 
about the size of the community that's *worrying* about the issues 
currently in front of this WG....

  1   10  10.75 Douglas Otis <[email-masked]>
  2   10  21.51 Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
  3   10  32.26 Bruce Lilly <[email-masked]>
  4   10  43.01 Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
  5    8  51.61 Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
  6    7  59.14 Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
  7    6  65.59 <[email-masked]>
  8    5  70.97 John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
  9    4  75.27 "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
 10    4  79.57 "Robert Snively" <[email-masked]>
 11    3  82.80 Eliot Lear <[email-masked]>
 12    2  84.95 [email-masked] (Scott Bradner)
 13    2  87.10 "Larry Masinter" <[email-masked]>
 14    2  89.25 "Lars-Erik Jonsson (LU/EAB)" 
<[email-masked]>
 15    2  91.40 Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
 16    1  92.47 Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>
 17    1  93.55 avri doria <[email-masked]>
 18    1  94.62 John Leslie <[email-masked]>
 19    1  95.70 Larry Masinter <[email-masked]>
 20    1  96.77 Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
 21    1  97.85 John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
 22    1  98.92 James M Galvin <[email-masked]>
 23    1 100.00 James Galvin <[email-masked]>

.
newtrk resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/index.html

---

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 07:06:23 +0200

Dear Harald,

When I saw your note, I said, "Oh, NOOOooooooooooo", because I was 
honestly expecting to be in the top three - but I am not.

I do care about the issues that are currently in front of this working 
group, but am probably posting more about the non-ISD-and-similar 
issues in this group's charter on the General Discussion list 
([email-masked]), and am mailing privately about three times as much as 
I am posting on all of these issues.

I agreed with the WG decision to focus on ISD over the last couple of 
meeting cycles, and haven't sought to change that decision lately 
because

- ISDs or something similar still make sense to me,

- if we figured out what we are doing with ISDs or something similar, 
that couldn't hurt,

- it seems to me that I've gotten precious little discussion on any of 
the "standards track" proposals I've co-authored since 2003 - and I'm 
not offended, because Scott hasn't gotten a lot more discussion on the 
ones he's co-authored, and, mostly,

- I have stopped believing that revving specific paragraphs in 2026 is 
sufficient, and have been trying to understand how we could do more 
than rev specific paragraphs in 2026, get community consensus on such 
changes, and get such changes implemented.

I agreed to scribe for Newtrk today (again) because I didn't think 
that our proposed agenda was likely to cover any of the 
more-than-revving-2026 changes today. If people want to spend five 
minutes on figuring out what OUR WG consensus is on what our scope 
should be, that would be lovely. If people want to spend five minutes 
on figuring out how we might come up with proposals for moving forward 
(for instance, if the IESG is too busy reviewing technical 
specifications to re-architect the IETF, who else might?), that would 
be lovely.

But I will keep my promise to Harald and take notes this morning.

Thanks,

Spencer

> Just to give you an idea of the size of the community that's 
> debating the issues currently in front of this WG...... which tells 
> you exactly nothing about the size of the community that's 
> *worrying* about the issues currently in front of this WG....
>
> newtrk 
> resources:_____________________________________________________
> mhonarc archive: 
> http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/index.html
> 

.