Re: [DNA] CONSENSUS CALL : Document merges

[Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>]

> Yes - it means "less work for the current authors ang the
> group".

OK

> But, my intention is not to reduce work alone, I am just concerned
> that more work may lead to the work not getting done in a timely
> manner.

Personally, I'm already concerned about the progress this WG is
making. IMO, not a lot has happened in the last 6+ months or so. In
terms of what needs to be done (technology wise), I think that is
pretty well understood. But we have too many documents, they overlap
in confusing/contradictory ways, but we aren't actually seeing much
progress in getting those documents cleaned up. IMO, anyway. As one
crude example, how many times have the various IDs been revved in the
last 2-3 IETF cycles? if the answer is one revision per IETF cycle,
that's not fast enough and indicates slow progress.

I would encourage the chairs to take stock of the situation and put
together a plan covering the next 3-6 months (with concrete milestones
and commitments from document editors) that show us getting done and
shipping documents to the IESG.

Thomas