Subject: [irtf-discuss] Request for feedback on "An IRTF Primer for IETF Participants"

From: Spencer Dawkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 13:39:48 -0500

Lars and I have been talking for an embarrassingly long time about a 
draft to help IETF folk who are proposing work in the IRTF, and that's 
finally happened.

Please comment (either on this list or privately is fine) about whether 
the document seems helpful based on your experience, and whether there 
are other things we should include.

Thanks,

Spencer, as an editor

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	[irsg] New Version Notification - draft-dawkins-irtf-newrg-01.txt
Date: 	Wed, 16 Apr 2014 11:32:11 -0700
From: 	[email-masked]
To: 	[email-masked], IRSG <[email-masked]>

A new version (-01) has been submitted for draft-dawkins-irtf-newrg:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-dawkins-irtf-newrg-01.txt

The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dawkins-irtf-newrg/

Diff from previous version:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-dawkins-irtf-newrg-01

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

IETF Secretariat.

---

From: Spencer Dawkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 11:03:28 -0500

Just following up ... any thoughts on this draft?

Thanks,

Spencer

On 04/16/2014 01:39 PM, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
> Please comment (either on this list or privately is fine) about 
> whether the document seems helpful based on your experience, and 
> whether there are other things we should include.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Spencer, as an editor
>

---

From: Scott Brim <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 08:25:49 -0400

Spencer (and Lars),

Section 2 is "the IRTF is not the IETF", and talks about what an RG
does NOT need to do, and MAY do. I suggest you add a section 3 which
gathers up the threads started in Section 2 and describes briefly what
IS expected in a request to start an RG - just to give a feeling of
what the flow would be like.

I did wonder how much of what's listed is essential, invariant versus
how the current IRTF chair likes to do things. That's Lars's call.
Perhaps the next IRTF chair can produce a revision.

Finally,

      "I work in research and engineering.  When we finish a project, if
      it works, it was engineering.  If it doesn't work, it was
      research." - anon

Well, I remember Dave Clark saying (to Noel maybe?), "If it has to
work when you're done, it's not research, it's engineering."

Scott

---

From: Spencer Dawkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 12:31:24 -0500

Hi, Scott,

Thanks for the comments! I knew I wasn't finished.

> what the flow would be like.

Lars has moved close enough to "act like an RG and we'll see if you are 
one" that I'm not sure how much more I can say about an expected flow. 
I'll think that over, and at a minimum, pull that quote out into a 
section 3 and explain it with pointers.

> Perhaps the next IRTF chair can produce a revision.

I wasn't working closely with IRTF RGs before Aaron Falk was IRTF chair, 
so my sample size is "2", but even based on that small sample, I agree 
with the observation that this doc is going to be "the Lars Edition". 
That's definitely worth pointing out.

> work when you're done, it's not research, it's engineering."

That's a better quote than the one I had for the point I'm making. I'll 
make the substitution. If you have any context (like roughly a year), 
I'd add that, too.

Thanks again,

Spencer