Subject: [edu-team] My notes from the June EDU meeting

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 10:51:21 -0500

Attending: Spencer, Mariam, Thomas, Avri

- any agenda bashing?

no bashing happened here

- finish off any conversations about the charter

Avri thinks we have rough consensus, with "rough" mostly around technical 
tutorials, doesn't believe that fine-tuning the language will make a 
significant difference

Thomas thinks it's time for Brian to go forward with this. Discussion on 
IETF list is unavoidable. Spencer agrees, and thinks discussion could be OK.

Avri wonders if the larger community actually has a strong inclination.

Existing language is restrictively permissive. Avri thanks the UN experience 
for the level of ambiguity in the charter. Thomas thinks "allowed" is 
actually the intention, and Avri thinks that it's "allowed, with Gen-AD 
agreement" - seems slightly odd, but AD is member of the team, and that's 
kind of off.

We talked about how teams are like/not like a WG, but Spencer begged that we 
have this conversation once, with Brian.

Thomas thinks that the more EDU smells like a WG, the less confusing this 
will be (we aren't in completely uncharted territory).

Avri thinks we're more of a service group than a working group.

We should probably have the once-for-all discussion face to face, over beer.

- make decision on class substitution

MIB doctor's list is actually working on the MIB class. Bert says this is a 
longer version of the WG chairs session, aimed at document authors. We got 
Bert's description in real-time.

Bert thinks it would be a pity to punt XML2RFC to make space for the MIB 
class.

We do think this is a good class to have? no one on the call says "no"

We do think it's OK for Montreal? MIB doctors are committed to doing this by 
MTL

Spencer is ready for another teacher in WG Leadership. Margaret had 
volunteered in Dallas - is she willing to do this tutorial in MTL?

Spencer really wants to have a class on "bringing new work into the IETF". 
By IETF 67? We think this needs to be a WG Chairs lunch - this time?

We think we can do a substitution (for WG Leadership, or for XML2RFC).

Avri thinks she can handle XML2RFC (either herself or someone else leading).

We've definitely done WG Leadership twice (IETF 64 and IETF 65), and would 
like to review the contents anyway.

We plan to swap MIB class in, for WG Leadership class out, at IETF 66.

- begin planning for IETF67 (in West Coast)

Spencer still likes "bringing new work in" - if Margaret likes doing it for 
WG chairs at IETF 66,

We would repeat MIB, not repeat XML2RFC (just based on guidelines)

We need to make decisions pretty quickly (in July - put this on our next 
agenda, discuss on mailing list.

New work for WG chairs lunch? Thomas wants to chat with Margaret - want to 
do a draft and socialize before they do a presentation

Spencer thinks "new work" really matters... "open heart" topic.

Thomas and Margaret have also talked about agendas and minutes - good WG 
chairs training topic? Want WG chairs to participate, not just be students

Would also like WG chair input for new-work (again, WG chairs as more than 
students)

Dave Meyer and Olaf have a draft on WG minutes, etc. - need to dovetail 
here.

Thomas and Margaret also thought re-looking at issue trackers was timely.

Thomas thinks it's still possible to do new-work at IETF 67, as a tutorial - 
just need a draft that gets comments by September

We need to talk about this more on the list

- anything else?

Next meeting would be July 7, probably a travel day for many participants. 
We'll discuss alternatives on the list. 

_______________________________________________
edu-team mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-team

---

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 11:00:31 -0500

OK, I'm awake now...

> Attending: Spencer, Mariam, Thomas, Avri

"The part of Mariam will be played by Mirjam Kuehne <[email-masked]>"...

What a dork I can be, sometimes.

Thanks,

Spencer

---

From: Avri Doria <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 18:48:35 +0200

On 2 jun 2006, at 17.51, Spencer Dawkins wrote:

> Avri thanks the UN experience for the level of ambiguity in the  
> charter.

Not what I think i said and certainly not what i meant.  What I meant  
was the the UN experience had taught me to call this creative ambiguity.

> We should probably have the once-for-all discussion face to face,  

I agree that we should have the discussion over beer, or fine wine,   
but 'once-for-all', i don't  about.

---

From: Avri Doria <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 20:00:05 +0200

On 2 jun 2006, at 18.48, Avri Doria wrote:

> I agree that we should have the discussion over beer, or fine  
> wine,  but 'once-for-all', i don't  about.
>

... i have doubts about ...

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 15:28:10 +0200

Avri,

To be clear about:

> Avri thinks we have rough consensus, with "rough" mostly around technical tutorials, doesn't believe that fine-tuning the language will make a significant difference
> 
> Thomas thinks it's time for Brian to go forward with this. Discussion on IETF list is unavoidable. Spencer agrees, and thinks discussion could be OK. 

you now want me to raise it with the IESG and then go for IETF review?

If so please send me another copy to be 100% sure I use the
right version.

     Brian

---

From: Radia Perlman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 23:02:22 -0700

There was a brief thread on the wgchairs list about using XML for RFCs, 
and there were some pointers
to some materials. Might we be able to get Elwyn or Tim Bray to update 
our web site with
example documents, instructions for running the tool, pointers to any 
other useful information out
on the web, etc?

Radia