Subject: [BLISS] Bliss design group mailing lists

From: "Dale Worley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 18:12:34 -0500

As far as I can tell, there are no publicly-visible pointers to the
Bliss design group mailing lists, or to the design groups themselves.
Relative to the concept that IETF participation is open to all, I think
that this is a serious deficiency, and we should add appropriate
pointers from the IETF Bliss WG page
(http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/bliss-charter.html) to the secret
Bliss WG page (http://bliss-ietf.org/) and from that page to the design
group pages (http://bliss-ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccbs_bliss-ietf.org,
etc.).

Dale

---

From: Shida Schubert <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 13:16:53 +0900

Hi Dale;

I will attend to this before the next IETF..

Many thanks for bringing this up and there was never an
intention to keep any of this secret

Regards
  Shida

On 12-Feb-09, at 8:12 AM, Dale Worley wrote:

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

---

From: Shida Schubert <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 12:38:36 +0900

Hi Dale;

Many thanks for bringing this up.

Regards
  Shida

---

From: "Mary Barnes" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 09:07:23 -0600

Dale and Shida,

Just to clarify this concern (and not debate how BLISS is handling
design teams) - per IETF WG process, it is actually okay to have a
closed design team - per section 6.5 of RFC 2418, stated as:
  "In order for a design team
   to remain small and agile, it is acceptable to have closed membership
   and private meetings."
The issue being that with open design teams folks can come and go as
they desire, but this can result in a lot of inefficiency in bringing
new attendees up to speed on conference calls for example.  And, based
on team efficiency studies, around 7 contributors is considered optimal
and allows everyone to contribute, which is the intent for design team
members. With too many folks , it's hard to stay focused AND to allow
everyone to provide input.  

The key is that nothing done by design teams is binding and it all MUST
go through normal WG process to gain approval, etc. 

Regards,
Mary. 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
Of Shida Schubert
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 10:17 PM
To: Worley, Dale (BL60:9D30)
Cc: BLISS
Subject: Re: [BLISS] Bliss design group mailing lists

Hi Dale;

Many thanks for bringing this up and there was never an intention to
keep any of this secret

Regards
  Shida

On 12-Feb-09, at 8:12 AM, Dale Worley wrote:

> Relative to the concept that IETF participation is open to all, I 
> think that this is a serious deficiency, and we should add appropriate

> Bliss WG page (http://bliss-ietf.org/) and from that page to the 
> design group pages 
> (http://bliss-ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccbs_bliss-ietf.org
> ,
> etc.).
>
> Dale
>
>

---

From: "Dale Worley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 17:04:24 -0500

On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 10:07 -0500, Barnes, Mary (RICH2:AR00) wrote:
> closed design team - [...]

I can see the logic in this.

What I'm more interested in is making sure that the information and mail
archives are findable -- more than once, I've had to do some creating
searching to find the pointers.

Dale